[VisualDarkness]

Hi,
I got a Pentax-F 17-28mm Fisheye that I would like to test at its intended fullframe. I've found a MZ-7 for about 35€, is that a good choice for it? Sadly the 260€ MZ-S + grip is a bit out of my budget I think. I've also found a K2 DMD and it looks nice but it's a bit more expensive at 120€ and more worn, looks great though with the worn look!

A couple of lenses I may try:
Pentax F 17-28mm F3.5-4.5 Fisheye
Sigma 28mm F2.8 Mini-Wide
Pentax DA 40mm F2.8
Pentax FA 50mm F1.4 (may be sold soon)
Pentax M 50mm F1.4 (may be sold soon)
Pentax DA 300mm F4
Sigma 20mm F1.8

As you can see many of the lenses I want to try lack an aperture ring but I can do without them. Also it would be nice if the K to M42 adapter worked with the camera.

Any suggestions?

[Adam]

Why not get something a bit older, like the super program? It's a much higher-quality piece than the MZ-7, though I suppose that the MZ-7 would do for a few tests as well

[VisualDarkness]

Why not get something a bit older, like the super program? It's a much higher-quality piece than the MZ-7, though I suppose that the MZ-7 would do for a few tests as well

I guess that it is way better for manual focusing? It would be fun to try film AF but considering how brutal my fathers old Minolta works in anything less than optimal I doubt how useful it would be.



I guess a Super Program would be the best fit of the "tank" series of cameras. Thanks for the suggestion! I'll be looking around for something not overpriced. How does for example a K2 DMD or other film cameras compare to the Super Program? Just in case I run a deal.

[stevebrot]

Any K-mount camera should work with your fisheye. As for ease of manual focus...it depends on the camera. They are all a little bit different, though the M and A bodies have uniformly excellent viewfinders.


Steve

[John Shriver]

I would recommend the MZ-5n or ZX-5n (depending on your country) over the MZ-7 or ZX-7. The reason is that the 5 has conventional controls, very nice to use. The 7 is not nice to use in manual mode. One advantage of the 7 is multiple-exposure support if you're into that sort of thing.

Downsides of that whole series of cameras is the mirror motor gear that splits, and the cost of CR2 batteries. You can avoid the latter by using the AA grip, which is dirt cheap.

[titrisol]

Yes the MZ7 is a great choice
I used it with the SMC 17/4 and it rocks

[VisualDarkness]

Any K-mount camera should work with your fisheye. As for ease of manual focus...it depends on the camera. They are all a little bit different, though the M and A bodies have uniformly excellent viewfinders.


Steve

The MX is haunting but seems to be quite expensive in any good condition around here. LX is unreachable.

I would recommend the MZ-5n or ZX-5n (depending on your country) over the MZ-7 or ZX-7. The reason is that the 5 has conventional controls, very nice to use. The 7 is not nice to use in manual mode. One advantage of the 7 is multiple-exposure support if you're into that sort of thing.

Downsides of that whole series of cameras is the mirror motor gear that splits, and the cost of CR2 batteries. You can avoid the latter by using the AA grip, which is dirt cheap.

I've been looking for a good condition MZ-5n around here but either they are untested (yet fetch some good money) or simply totally broken. I guess there are collectors in Europe hogging the good ones.

Yes the MZ7 is a great choice

It looks like the best one I actually can find for sale at a decent price in Europe with support for DA lenses.

[cmohr]

I used my 17-28 on my MZ-5 and MZ-5n all the time, I particularly liked the Pano - mode, that closed down a set of shutters in the viewfinder so as you only see "wide-screen" it would then also only expose a "panorama" on the film, so as the people developing it would print the pics as "pano's" as well. Some people would say you didn't need it, but it made a real difference in composing landscapes as you knew exactly what you were going to get.

[VisualDarkness]

I used my 17-28 on my MZ-5 and MZ-5n all the time, I particularly liked the Pano - mode, that closed down a set of shutters in the viewfinder so as you only see "wide-screen" it would then also only expose a "panorama" on the film, so as the people developing it would print the pics as "pano's" as well. Some people would say you didn't need it, but it made a real difference in composing landscapes as you knew exactly what you were going to get.

Do you got any shots from that combo?

[cmohr]

Do you got any shots from that combo?

I know I do have one that I scanned about 10 years ago, I only have a PSD of the file, and its about 180mb, I don't currently have Photoshop on my puter, but I'll see what I can do..

[Ratmagiclady]

A little late to think of it, but one thing about the MZ7/MZ 5 sort of series that may be of import when it comes to using a lens as wide as a 17 is, you only get about 95 percent finder coverage of the film frame: (Not too bad, otherwise, those finders, but not covering the whole frame by a ways) that might be a case for using an older body or something with a better finder, even if it means giving up some automation, depending what you want to be doing with that wide end.

[VisualDarkness]

Time to bump this one as I just bought a camera but haven't received it yet. I'll get a Pentax SF7 in a package deal with other "junk" and we'll see if it works.

[VisualDarkness]

Am I correct that the P30n/P3n will work nicely with DA lenses?

[titrisol]

Yes, the P30 works fine but in P mode only, no Av mode or AF tough