|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-27-2010, 09:11 AM
|
| |
Then I apologise - I read your post as implying 8 element lenses could only be yellow if they were part of the overlap and used glass from the 7 element design.
I'm glad we agree that the (non/) presence of yellowing shouldn't be used to identify a lens though. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-27-2010, 09:02 AM
|
| |
You misunderstand me, I'm sure there is an overlap, however, using that as a way to explain yellowed lenses is the part I don't buy into.
Mine is a very early S/N and unlikely to be part of any overlap, however, it is yellow. Whether it used radioactive glass or not is a moot point - the purpose of this thread (as I read it ) is to help people identify an early version of this lens - I'm simply pointing out (from first hand experience of a 3 lens sample) that the idea of 8 element versions not yellowing simply isn't true. ;)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-27-2010, 08:50 AM
|
| |
There seems to be some confusion on the whole yellowing thing so let me just add my own observations:
I've now handled three of these (early) lenses and own one (the one featured on the lens review page funnily enough) and all of them have displayed yellowing. If you look at the pictures of mine you'll see it was actually yellow at the time of posing for its photoshoot (although after a nice summer-long UV bath on the windowsill it's looking much clearer now).
I can only conclude that the early version is just as prone to yellowing as the later one, and that the presence/absence of yellowing is no indication as to whether you have an 8 or a 7 element version on your hands. As mine has a very low serial number I don't think the "overlap" theory holds much water either - sorry!
I hope that clears things up (no pun intended) for people anyway. :)
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-27-2010, 11:06 AM
|
| |
Sorry for the delay, here's my SP500:
Notes: Although the speed dial is only marked as far as 1/500 it does have an extra unmarked stop beyond (just like the S1a) which I assume would be 1/1000. As a budget model there's no self timer but it does have a roller built into the film door (unlike early Spottys). I believe the supplied lens was the Super-Takumar 55/2.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-26-2010, 10:28 AM
|
| |
I use a M28/2.8 with my LX and haven't had any problems with exposure - is it possible it's down to technique?
The LX uses a centre-weighted metering system and shots outdoors with any wide angle lens will include more sky than those shot with a "normal" lens - this can have quite an effect on the outcome as the light in the sky is given more prominence than it's due. The trick is usually to point the camera down and lock a reading from a patch of grass (or any midtone) before recomposing and shooting.
Do you have the same underexposure problem indoors? If not then the above is where I would put my money. :)
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-25-2010, 02:31 AM
|
| |
PS. Flash sync on the S1a is a seperate position between 1/60 and 1/30. I never had the manual but I believe I read somewhere that it was 1/50?
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-25-2010, 02:28 AM
|
| |
Sorry, the day after I took those S1a photos it took off for its new home so I can't measure it.
I did dig out the SP500 yesterday though, so I'll take some photos of that in the next couple of days.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-18-2010, 08:46 AM
|
| |
Here's some pics of the early-model S1a (currently for sale and probably going on eBay in the next few days):
As before, feel free to use them as you like but don't expect them to be on Photobucket forever - save them to your own server asap please.
Not had a look to see if the SP500's still there but I'll check later in the week and post some pictures if it is. :)
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-18-2010, 02:37 AM
|
| |
I've got an early version of the S1a (#547350) if you're interested? It's got the green "R" on the rewind crank and the slightly higher iris pin actuator, as well as the release on the film door rather than the body.
I think I have a broken SP500 in my parts bin somewhere too, but I'll have to check on that next time I'm in the garage.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-17-2010, 08:48 AM
|
| |
Your wish etc etc... ;)
I've highlighted the parts that don't quite add up - feel free to use the pics any way you want.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-14-2010, 02:48 PM
|
| |
Just to confuse the issue, I have a hybrid early/late Spotmatic.
It looks like a later model; lower profile film counter, top plate attachment method, self timer lever, meter switch and (the icing on the cake) 23102 stamped on the baseplate.
However, the serial number is 1443403 (stamped in the earlier font) and there's no roller inside the film door - as per the early version.
Which I guess means mine was made around the time of the changes from whatever bits were laid to hand...
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-09-2010, 03:28 PM
|
| |
You may want these as well while I think of it:
Optical formula 1957 Takumar 58mm f/2
Optical formula 1964 Super-Takumar 50mm f/1.4
Notice the cemented triplet with curved surfaces in the Super-Tak - very difficult and expensive to manufacture and it's said Asahi lost money on every copy sold; hence it didn't last very long. This was meant as a Planar-killer and once its crown had been awarded by the press the simplified 7/6 version was quietly ushered in (before the 8/6 crippled Asahi's finances).
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-09-2010, 11:27 AM
|
| |
Here's two more you can add to the database (as I don't see photos of either on there right now). You may want to save them to your own server though as I can't guarantee the links to Photobucket will remain valid forever.
First is the 1957 Takumar 58mm f/2 (Sonnar design). An incredibly rare lens at the best of times, common wisdom says it was only available with a distance scale marked in feet *or* meters (market dependent) but mine has a dual scale to disprove this. :)
Second is the first (1964) version of the Super-Takumar 50/1.4. Another rare lens that was in production for only a few months, it differs from all the later 50/1.4's by employing an 8 element / 6 group design instead of the simplified 7/6 that replaced it. You can tell it apart from the later (1965) Super Takumar model by the protruding rear element, the switch marked A/M (instead of Auto/Manual) and the f/2 position is marked with a number rather than a dot. It's also slightly heavier but unless you had one in each hand that wouldn't show... ;)
 |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-03-2009, 02:12 PM
|
| |
Well spotted Martin - that one had slipped my mind. I try not to think about lenses I can't afford... ;)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-03-2009, 12:20 PM
|
| |
Thank you for linking to that, as the seller of that particular item it's always nice to get the extra coverage! :)
If you look at my other items you'll see I'm also selling a matching silver FA28-80 which will probably end up going cheap. ;)
AFAIK, Pentax never made any silver lenses in the older MF ranges. If you really want a silver MF prime then you'll have to go down the M42 route - chrome Zeiss Tessars are fairly commonplace and very good quality. I'm also selling one of these at the moment but a later model in black unfortunately.
Personally, I've found that the FA43 is all the lens I ever need on film. I have a silver one that lives on my MX and is, frankly, sublime. The silver paint of the FA series though isn't an exact match for the earlier chrome bodies, rather they were intended to match the silver on the MZ/ZX series. Still looks good though!
 |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-15-2009, 03:56 PM
|
| |
The Carl Zeiss Biotar is a 58mm f/2 lens and is both rare and common at the same time - rare(ish) to find in Zeiss livery but as common as muck as the Helios 44 (the standard lens with Zenit cameras for donkey's years). After WWII the Carl Zeiss factory in Jena was in the "Russian" half of Germany and much of the tooling and materials were taken to factories in the USSR as war reparations - this included the Biotar design and many of the first Helios lenses used parts from Germany that had been stockpiled in the Jena factory. It's fair to say that the Russian (Helios) lenses suffered from patchy build quality hence the Zeiss versions are generally worth more on the used market.
Whichever version you have can be a very good performer with excellent levels of sharpness right from f/2 and an unusual (yet pleasing) bokeh.
The version you have is a preset lens. You set the desired aperture by pulling the front ring down and selecting the required f-stop. You actually stop the lens down by rotating the ring - keep it open for focussing and close it for taking the picture (and metering). The number on the front is the serial number; Zeiss apparently use some form of osmosis to randomly choose serial numbers so it won't tell you much I'm afraid.
You should get excellent results, although obviously not quite as good as the results you'd get if you used it on a Pentax... ;)
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
02-25-2009, 09:43 AM
|
| |
SRS will ship to Portugal but the automated system won't deal with non-UK addresses, hence you'll need to email them or give them a call. Very good company to deal with.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-27-2008, 03:54 PM
|
| |
Quick shift focussing, SMC coatings - there's another two...
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
10-03-2008, 03:51 AM
|
| |
These guys sell adaptors for Zeiss Contax MM and Leica R lenses to be used on K-mount cameras. I'm trying to stop myself buying a nice Leica Summicron 90 to use on my MX and K10D as we speak... ;)
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-23-2008, 03:26 AM
|
| |
I'd also like to put in a vote for the FA43 - absolutely wonderful on film, tiny and light and works as an AF lens on later bodies. Should keep hold of its resale value pretty well too... If you're only having one lens then your camera deserves a Limited! ;)
These were taken last weekend with an MX / FA43 / Fuji Reala 100 (straight scans done at time of processing, no cropping or other PP):
Attachment 12703
Attachment 12704
Attachment 12705
Attachment 12706
Although it's difficult to tell from the screen resolution, the print of the last picture is as sharp and contains as much detail as anything I've ever shot on 35mm. Oh, and the 43mm balances absolutely perfectly on an MX so it should do on an ME Super as well. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-17-2008, 05:53 PM
|
| |
You've obviously given this a lot of thought and I like the sound of the camera you describe, but to be honest I don't think it's a K1000D. This is how I see it;
The K1000 was such a success because it was cheap, rugged and a true camera for the masses (at the time) - the camera you describe is a retro version of the same camera but not a camera for the masses (a bit like New Mini; the original was popular because it was a classless workhorse that gave many people their first taste of car ownership - the sequel merely traded on the looks and the reputation but was a study in style over substance, it wasn't in any way a radical design in the way the original was).
The reason the K1000 was made of metal was because the hard wearing engineering plastics that we take for granted today simply weren't available - pressed metal was the most economical material to use back then. If Pentax had had access to cheap polycarbonates then you can be sure that's what the K1000 would have been made of! The feature set for the K1000 was also in line with what the competition of the day offered but it was cheaper (a strategy that Pentax still use).
I think a future K1000D should be aimed squarely at first time DSLR (or any camera) buyers and, as such, should offer the following:
- Compact and lightweight plastic body, small enough (with appropriate lens) to fit in a pocket or handbag. Available in a choice of colours too.
- "Crippled" KAF2 mount, simply because it's cheaper to make and Pentax want to sell new glass - not keep eBay in business.
- Green, PASM and plenty of scene modes for beginners.
- Pentamirror viewfinder.
- No SR or anti-dust facilities.
- Minimal external buttons and no dials (maybe a small 4 way joystick like the one on the new Ricoh R8 that all the reviewers seem to like).
- A large LCD screen with "soft" buttons like the Samsung NV models.
- Single shot AF (no continuous) with single central AF point.
- 3 FPS should be plenty.
- No internal flash (and P-TTL only - see comment on KAF2 mount above).
- Lithium battery for weight saving.
- Proprietery sensor - I doubt it would cost any more in the long run to use their own (Samsung) 14MP CMOS sensor than it would to keep sourcing a defunct design from Sony, probably be much cheaper if they sold enough units.
- No battery grip.
- No weather sealing.
In addition I'd launch a new ultra-compact flash unit (GN approx 15, P-TTL only) in a matching range of colours and a reworking of the FA35/2 as a DA at a bargain-basement price (equivalent of all those 50/2's that were sold alongside the original K1000).
So the camera I'm talking about would actually be more like a point-and-shoot digicam but with interchangeable lenses and an optical viewfinder. I doubt that there would be many on these forums queueing up to buy one but what if Pentax were to offer such a camera for less than $100?
Canon effectively bought their DSLR dominance not by producing a brilliant camera but by breaking a psychological barrier - the original 300D/Digital Rebel caught the public attention by selling for less than $1000 at a time when DSLR's were out of the reach of the masses. By selling a brand new DSLR for $99 Pentax would be truly capturing the spirit of the original K1000 and bringing (quite literally) millions of new customers into the K-mount fold, many of whom would migrate to more expensive (and profitable) Pentax cameras and buy Pentax lenses - this could only benefit the rest of us Pentax users as a result. Maybe they'd even have enough funds in the kitty to launch "enthusiast" cameras like the one outlined in the OP.
So, in summary, yes I'd like to see a K1000D but I think it should be dirt cheap, packed with user-friendly features and be backed by a massive advertising campaign (get the folks who launched the iPod in for that one). People who know absolutely nothing about cameras should be able to take it home, put in a battery and card and start taking great pictures without any further input. The image quality will be much better than any digicam on the market and pretty soon people will once again ask each other, "Have you got a Pentax?" rather than, "Have you got a camera?" :cool:
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-14-2008, 11:52 AM
|
| |
You're quite correct, FA and earlier lenses have no quick-shift, only DA lenses have that feature.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
01-27-2008, 10:13 AM
|
| |
Amateur Photographer magazine here in the UK recently tested the Samsung/Pentax 12-24's and 50-200's side-by-side and found that the light transmission of the Samsung variants was marginally better than the Pentax ones (although by such a tiny amount as to be un-noticeable to the human eye - we're talking lab measurements here). In all other respects the lenses performed in an identical fashion with tiny differences being no more than you'd expect from two random samples of the same lens.
Any colour casts are now compensated for by the camera's white balance system meaning that (unlike on film) this isn't an issue either.
In conclusion, there is absolutely no difference between lenses badged as Pentax and lenses badged as Samsung/Schneider - unsuprising as they're almost certainly made on the same production lines by the same people from the same components.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
01-26-2008, 09:22 AM
|
| |
The FA and the DA lenses project an image circle onto an area larger than the APS-C sensor (FF in the case of the FA's, APS-H in the case of most of the DA's). They have to do this because a stabilised sensor is moving up/down and side-to-side as the photo is being taken, if the image circle only "just" covered APS-C you'd have vignetting where the edges of the sensor were being shifted outside of that area.
In order to have a FF sensor with stabilisation you'd need lenses with an image circle larger than FF, so you can discount the idea of any of your existing glass working on such a body. Canikon get away with it because the stabilisation is in each lens, not the body. Those manufacturers using in-body systems could probably make a compromise by having stabilisation work on a new even-bigger-still lens system (XLA? ;) ) and have it shut down when an FA/etc lens is attached. Wonderful. :rolleyes:
Personally, I think technology will overcome any shortcomings of the APS-C (or thereabouts) sensor within the next 5 years and the current FF models will be remembered as dinosaurs that tried to cling to an outdated principle well beyond its sell-by date. Just my $0.02
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-19-2008, 01:09 PM
|
| |
35mm macro for me please! :cool:
And I'd like the DA*18mm f2.8 Tilt/Shift - oh wait, I just dreamed about that one... :o
|
