[jakeblues]

The Voigtlander SL2 20 and 40 are my two go to pancakes wether on my MX or my K-01, and if you want another pancake to go even wider there is the takumar fisheyes, thats probably the next lens on my list to complete my little 3 pancake kit...

AWESOME. I've always been curious about these two lenses. Have you ever, by chance, owned the Pentax M 20mm f/4 to compare to the CV 20?

If you have more images, keep them coming!

[jakeblues]

Just wanted to give a quick update.

As a result of some advice on this thread, I snagged an M 40 and a K 35/3.5. I already love both for different reasons - the M 40 has some vignetting wide open, which I like in certain contexts, and the K 35 is a seriously ugly, seriously sharp lens. Both have a lot of character.

[LesDMess]

Since you have the fast Rokkor, you might also consider the fast Pentax . . .

[B Grace]

The premise of this thread is interesting in that it points back to Leica-style photography from 50 years ago. There are times when I want to take high quality photographs in environments where my SLR gear isn't really welcome and when I'm traveling on vacation, especially when flying to/from a destination. For that matter there are limits on the amount of camera gear I can pack in our car when we drive to our vacation destinations. A compact camera and a couple of compact lenses are ideal and the age-old Leica approach was a 35 and a 50. For a person interested in prints up to 11x14 or so and shots taken in the range available with 35 and 50 primes a small kit of such is liberating when out shooting in crowds or in remote areas.

If I were starting from scratch with such a camera kit I'd pick one of the Oly Pen digital cameras and a couple of the nice prime lenses which go with them. For film, I'm very tempted by the mint M3 Leicas which seem pretty common these days as well as the simple 35 and 50 primes. Cameras don't get much more compact than that. I've always found interesting the little Leica M Lens Carrier device which shows up in the catalogs. The idea of a bracket for holding an extra lens under the M rangefinder camera attached to the camera body by the tripod mount screw is fascinating.

I've also believed in the idea of lens families or lens companions although my concern may be more about aesthetics than technical capabilities. If I were to choose a K35 Pentax prime I would pair it with a K-series 50 thinking they would offer similar color rendition. It's true of course that Pentax updated its coating processes over time and during the production of multiple series of lenses so a person could shoot a K lens with an A-series lens with little concern for image quality variation. I know it's silly but there is a sense of completeness with a camera kit consisting of 2 or 3 lenses of matched vintage, as if the kit's capabilities are consistent.

However you look at it, the goal is to have a camera at hand when you want to shoot.

[jtkratzer]

The premise of this thread is interesting in that it points back to Leica-style photography from 50 years ago. There are times when I want to take high quality photographs in environments where my SLR gear isn't really welcome and when I'm traveling on vacation, especially when flying to/from a destination. For that matter there are limits on the amount of camera gear I can pack in our car when we drive to our vacation destinations. A compact camera and a couple of compact lenses are ideal and the age-old Leica approach was a 35 and a 50. For a person interested in prints up to 11x14 or so and shots taken in the range available with 35 and 50 primes a small kit of such is liberating when out shooting in crowds or in remote areas.

If I were starting from scratch with such a camera kit I'd pick one of the Oly Pen digital cameras and a couple of the nice prime lenses which go with them. For film, I'm very tempted by the mint M3 Leicas which seem pretty common these days as well as the simple 35 and 50 primes. Cameras don't get much more compact than that. I've always found interesting the little Leica M Lens Carrier device which shows up in the catalogs. The idea of a bracket for holding an extra lens under the M rangefinder camera attached to the camera body by the tripod mount screw is fascinating.

I've also believed in the idea of lens families or lens companions although my concern may be more about aesthetics than technical capabilities. If I were to choose a K35 Pentax prime I would pair it with a K-series 50 thinking they would offer similar color rendition. It's true of course that Pentax updated its coating processes over time and during the production of multiple series of lenses so a person could shoot a K lens with an A-series lens with little concern for image quality variation. I know it's silly but there is a sense of completeness with a camera kit consisting of 2 or 3 lenses of matched vintage, as if the kit's capabilities are consistent.

However you look at it, the goal is to have a camera at hand when you want to shoot.

This the boat I'm in trying to put a three lens kit together. I have a K28/3.5 and a K55/1.8 and I'd like to get mg hands on a K85/1.8. At some point, the K50/1.4 or 1.2 would be great, but I already have an A50/1.4 and an F50/1.7.

All of those manual lenses work well on my LX, ME Super, and KM. I find myself leaning toward putting different film in each body for changing conditions/subjects, but maybe that's the luxury of having multiple bodies.

I have a strong feeling my daughter is going to want to work with one of these when she's older. She'll be three in March (yeah, plenty of time until she runs a manual camera), but she has a blast taking shots with a tired digital point and shoot. It's hysterical look at what a 2-year old thinks are interesting subjects to photograph.

We went out for a session with the two kids yesterday and I had a hard time picking why I wanted to shoot with. We brought the K-5 for some larger prints and to catch something for a Christmas card, but I love shooting film and carrying a small bag with the K-5, F50, 18-55 kit lens, along with the ME Super, LX and two K lenses was easy when two cameras were in the bag and one was out for use. But with two kids, I would prefer to carry less.

[jakeblues]

I find myself leaning toward putting different film in each body for changing conditions/subjects, but maybe that's the luxury of having multiple bodies.

I do this too... I often have high speed BW in one body and slow color film in another.

I have a K28/3.5 and a K55/1.8 and I'd like to get mg hands on a K85/1.8

Or maybe a longer lens like a 135? I don't really understand the obsession with 85mm lenses. In my humble opinion, these are MUCH more specialized lenses than, say, a 135mm or 200mm lens. I find 85mm not all that different in function than a 55mm.

It's always interesting to me to hear what focal lengths other people consider staples of their collections, and which ones they consider "specialized" (i.e. they don't use much). 20mm and 24mm are two of my staple lenses (I have heard these called "special purpose"), but I almost never use 85mm. Once the focal lengths get above 100mm, I start to use them more frequently.

[jtkratzer]

I do this too... I often have high speed BW in one body and slow color film in another.



Or maybe a longer lens like a 135? I don't really understand the obsession with 85mm lenses. In my humble opinion, these are MUCH more specialized lenses than, say, a 135mm or 200mm lens. I find 85mm not all that different in function than a 55mm.

It's always interesting to me to hear what focal lengths other people consider staples of their collections, and which ones they consider "specialized" (i.e. they don't use much). 20mm and 24mm are two of my staple lenses (I have heard these called "special purpose"), but I almost never use 85mm. Once the focal lengths get above 100mm, I start to use them more frequently.

That's exactly what I have now, or did until I finished a roll. I have 3200 B&W in one right now and Portra 160 or Ektar 100 is going in the other. Both the LX and ME Super are relatively new to me, so I'm looking at which camera and lenses work best with each film or if it even makes a difference which body/lens exposes the film.

As for the lens, I would like something longer than a 50 and I've heard the expression that if you're not going to havea bunch of lenses, each lens should double the focal length of the previous. Which would put me in that 100-105 range. I recently grabbed a Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5, but that's a pretty large lens for walking around with if I'm not mistaken.

Other than the K-5 kit lens, I've never had anything wider than 28.

I guess I should find a local Pentaxian who might let me take a look at a few lenses I don't have. Anyone in southeastern Pennsylvania?

[unixrevolution]

My Three-lens kit under 50mm for full frame consists of:

SMC Pentax A 50mm F/1.7 (Smaller and better handling than the 1.4, only one-halfish stop of luminosity difference.)
SMC Pentax FA 35mm F/2 (Autofocus, yes...but a truly sweet optical formula, tack sharp and beautiful, and great on a manual focus camera also...the manual focus feel of the FA primes is quite good.)
Sigma Ultra Wide II 24mm f/2.8 Macro (This is an unusually sharp, contrasty 24mm...with a 35 in the mix it makes sense to have something wider than 28. The Sigma also focuses VERY close, capable of actual 1:4 macro shots.)

Of course, if asked to pick just one of those 3, it'd be the 35.

To make it the perfect 4-lens kit, I just add my Tamron 90mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro, and I'm set!

I too shoot an ME Super and an MX, along with a SUper Program, K1000 and the mighty LX. I use these lenses on manual focus, manual aperture SLRs all the time and they work a treat. They are also all fully forward-compatible with AF film Pentaxi and digitals as well.

[Nesster]

The premise of this thread is interesting in that it points back to Leica-style photography from 50 years ago.

Hearking back a couple of additional decades, I think maybe the best bang for the buck set up is the Kiev + Jupiter-8 + Jupiter-12 (35mm) + Jupiter-9 (85mm) + some external finder that covers 35 and 85mm. Or for more money the Contax equivalents. These are very decent cameras, though from before the time of spacious view finders... and the lenses are right near the top of what can be done with 35mm.

[TomB_tx]

While I really like the Pentax MX and small M-series lenses, my favorite "minimalist" camera and lenses for small size and quality is my 1954 Leica IIIf with 50mm f3.5 Elmar (1941) and 35mm f3.5 Summaron (1952). The camera may be MX-sized, but these Leica lenses are downright tiny, and I'll put their results up against any modern lenses. All they give up is speed, and I find f3.5 is fine when you get used to it. I carried this combination in the army back in 1970-71 and it never failed me. Just had the IIIf through a full CLA and it is like new.
For a great Pentax lens, between the Leica and MX is an Auto-Takumar 35 f3.5 (M42) that of course can be used on the MX, and is even tinier than the equivalent Super Takumar or M-series K-mount. It's also a great performer.

[jakeblues]

my favorite "minimalist" camera and lenses for small size and quality is my 1954 Leica IIIf with 50mm f3.5 Elmar (1941) and 35mm f3.5 Summaron (1952).

I'm sure I'll be a leica owner at some point in my life. Though since I'm partial to wide angle lenses, I might end up with a Bessa R4A instead.

I'm getting married in a couple of months, and my photographer is an all-leica, all-film shooter. Though I think he uses M7s, not iiifs.

[unixrevolution]

I'm sure I'll be a leica owner at some point in my life. Though since I'm partial to wide angle lenses, I might end up with a Bessa R4A instead.

I'm getting married in a couple of months, and my photographer is an all-leica, all-film shooter. Though I think he uses M7s, not iiifs.

M7s are an almost must-have for a wedding shoot. Yummy, yummy autoexposure. Is he shooting the wedding in BW or color? Where's he based? What are his prices like?

The Bessa R*A's all do stepless TTL aperture-priority autoexposure as well. I'd be partial to one if I had more than a 35/50/85 combo for my M2.

Seems Leica ownership and covetousness is common amongst the film SLR crowd.

[jakeblues]

M7s are an almost must-have for a wedding shoot. Yummy, yummy autoexposure. Is he shooting the wedding in BW or color? Where's he based? What are his prices like?

He shoots whichever he fancies (but mostly fast BW), based in Miami, but travels worldwide (I'm in Los Angeles).