|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-09-2024, 05:10 PM
|
| |
The first two were indeed Ebay. I did not report. The third was Amazon -- and, yes, I was able to get satisfaction.
My SV was was the one Eric salvaged. The Asahiflex had the bad timings -- I eventually bought from a member of this forum, and it works well. The SP-F I eventually got from KEH after Amazon issued a refund.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-09-2024, 05:02 PM
|
| |
Yes, unfortunately that is true. One "mint" camera had scratches and a bad dent in the pentaprism, but at least Eric was able fully to recondition ir. Another "near-mint" camera was indeed good in appearance, but its shutter timings were so shot they could not be repaired at all. And a third camera body "like new" turned out to have a pentaprism smeared over with fungus.
I realize very well I may have been very unlucky or very injudicious in my choice of vendors -- although I did learn also to take even stellar online reviews with a grain of salt. But still, my experience is, unfortunately, my experience.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-09-2024, 03:28 PM
|
| |
When a Japanese listing says "mint", it may mean "mint with dents", "mint with scratches", or "mint with fungus". Online listing are best avoided. If shopping on person, I'd bring a flashlight and a magnifying glass.
Exquisite politeness does not imply unyielding honesty.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-06-2024, 08:38 AM
|
| |
He should watch for fungus, wherever he shops. Japan is hot and humid enough that any used equipment from it is automatically suspect. I've been burned enough never to buy anything direct from Japan again.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Price Watch
03-28-2024, 09:37 AM
|
| |
As long as the lens is in working condition, all's good.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
03-23-2024, 09:54 AM
|
| |
This is a really important point. Indeed the viewfinder main function is to aid composition by removing extraneous items from the frame.
I don't think, however, that an optical viewfinder is necessarily best. Even historically photographers shrouded the ground glass on their view cameras and adjusted their framing. -- Well, also tofocus properly, of course.
Everyone has their preferences, of course. However, the EVF is, I my experience, superior to the OVF in dim light.
In any case, the viewfinder isolates the frame well, whether it's electronic, optical, or simply covered ground glass. A rear screen simply does not offer this isolation.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
03-21-2024, 03:50 PM
|
| |
Despite my general stance against excessive electronic displays, which I mentioned above...
There is one feature that may or may not be available in the viewfinder, depending on the digital camera model, that actually is useful for handheld photography, and one that I've switched on as required. I'm thinking of a horizontal level line, which will tilt if the camera body is not positioned horizontally level -- an electronic visual equivalent of the bubble levels on a theodolite. That can really help when photographing with a tilted/shifted lens, so that the composition has a set square reference point.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
03-20-2024, 10:03 PM
|
| |
The OP is not alone. When I got my MILC camera in 2014, after about 33 years of shooting film only, I fiddled with the settings until the back screen was off, and the viewfinder showed just aperture, shutter speed, and a split-image focussing centre. And I've kept it that way ever since.
I'm probably missing out on a lot of things, but I enjoy the photography more this way.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
03-17-2024, 01:04 PM
|
| |
OK, we agree as one on this one. :)
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
03-17-2024, 08:25 AM
|
| |
No, it is NOT about "good enough". It's about knowing what your camera is capable of and using its capabilities to the fullest. Dynamic range, white balance, color response and so on can all be set without running to the PC for cover.
I've said my piece in this thread.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
03-16-2024, 09:49 PM
|
| |
Actually, no, the question is decidedly not about "good enough" versus "some ideal picture".
Shooting JPEG is about making sure all the camera settings are just right before you release the shutter, so that the JPEG is as close to what you want as possible.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
03-15-2024, 08:21 PM
|
| |
I'll offer a slightly different perspective.
The main purpose of post-processing the RAW files seems to be error-correction or image enhancement. Neither is required if you nailed your shot -- composition, exposure, timing -- when you pulled the trigger.
Sometimes it's good to live with your failures and even small misses. If you can see them, you can take steps to avoid them the next time.
For that reason I have my digital camera set to JPEG on principle.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-13-2024, 06:17 PM
|
| |
In my days at university I volunteered at the students' newspaper and did a fair bit of assisting work in the darkroom. All the film was BW. I really gained an appreciation of and respect for development then. But I also understood I'd really rather not do it myself, by myself. The main skills it requires -- orderly, pedantic, careful lab work and split second timing and temperature control -- are, I think, very complementary to the musing, impressionistic process of landscape view composition that is the chief reason I love photography.
If you are a developer, my real respect! But it's not everyone's cuppa tea.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
03-13-2024, 06:11 PM
|
| |
Try shooting a roll of black and white normally. True B&W like Ilford HP5 or Kodak TriX. In bright daylight to minimize moody grainyness. If your exposures are OK then you know your camera is good.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-13-2024, 02:44 PM
|
| |
I'm really not sure home development will ever massively take off unless some sort of an idiot proof push button machine is invented and cheaply sold.
The more interesting question, to which there's no answer yet, is whether the introduction of more new film cameras by Pentax and others will ever create enough of a demand for film and development to pull prices down.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
03-12-2024, 04:57 PM
|
| |
As regards the 50mm, keep the 1.7 beyond all doubt. It is a much superior lens to the 2.0
As regards the wide angles, my advice would be to shoot several rolls of film and to understand how the views you want to capture relate to the amount of work you have to do to obtain them with the prime lens you've got.
So if you want a wider view, shoot from further back. Does that involve a slight inconvenience? Then maybe a 35 is the wide angle you want. Or do you find that you really have to go back much further? Than perhaps a 28.
However, you may find that shooting from further back offers no inconvenience at all. That would mean you may not need a wide angle yet.
I shot for over twenty years with only a 50mm.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-12-2024, 10:58 AM
|
| |
I think for the occasions when a non TTL view path is absolutely essential, a removable auxiliary hotshoed viewfinder is a better option than a dual-lens system.
Parallax would probably be comparable, framing in the viewfinder would have to be matched to the lens or lenses in any case and does not present any disadvantage relative to a TLR, but it is very convenient to remove equipment when it is not necessary.
The one issue is ease of focusing. But this would only seem to be a problem if any darkening filters simply cannot be removed from the lens.
I understand very well TLR is largely a medium-format thing. Indeed, waist-level composition without auxiliary eyepieces requires at least a MF frame -- as anyone who's squinted at an Asahiflex from above will attest.
Please bear in mind that everything I've said should be understood only in the context of film photography. For digital, it would seem mirrorless EVF solves all these issues anyway.
But I remain of the opinion that for 35mm photography, a TLR system is not the way to go. For me, anyway. I'm sure someone out there will be affronted by my temerity :lol: and rebut me again. But I've only conveyed my personal preference. That's it, I've said my piece. :cool:
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
03-11-2024, 08:19 AM
|
| |
What other people have said. With old cameras you sometimes have to work around poor shutter speed or meter calibration. I know I've had to do it. It's easiest to adjust the ISO. Try setting your ISO half speed relative to the box -- 400 film set 200, 200 film 100, etc. -- and see the results.
The argument about whether to overexpose or underexpose film is partly technical and partly aesthetic. Play around a bit and you'll find the look you really like for yourself.
I like your compositions, of people especially.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-09-2024, 10:09 AM
|
| |
This pro vs dude photo argument goes back a long way. In the sixties already Mad magazine had both sides down pat.
Foto Phashions: The Schmo & The Pro #MadMagazine #vintage ? | Flickr
Remember: you're not a pro photographer unless you wear an ankh!
In general, the mass market is where the money is made -- certainly not the hobbyist market and even less the professional one. This goes for many industries besides photography.
In reviving film, Ricoh is betting to cut a piece of the mass market.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-09-2024, 08:47 AM
|
| |
I'm sorry, but the artistic side of nourishment (pixxa) and homicide (Damascus steel) have always been completely secondary to business and economic considerations.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
03-08-2024, 09:50 PM
|
| |
I've had crappy eyesight all my life (-9 to -10 after the age of 20) but I have always photographed while wearing contact lenses. When I developed presbyopia in my late forties, I fit the reading glasses by myself (+1.5 seems to work best), but for photography I had my eyesight properly tested to +2.25, so using the guidelines for the correction glass before I ordered Pentax +2 and +1 correction lenses to fit the camera eyepiece -- it turned out the +2 works best.
(The M-series eyepiece adapters fit all subsequent Pentax SLRs and DSLRs, so far as I know, but are just a little loose on the K series prior cameras.)
If your prescription is stronger than -6, I suppose you could see if your optician could fit a custom lens into the correction lens adapter. Otherwise, it seems hard to do photography without contact lenses.
 |
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-08-2024, 02:18 PM
|
| |
That seems to be an extreme point of view for the sake of an extreme point of view. Forgive me, I have no interest in playing that game.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-08-2024, 12:59 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
03-08-2024, 10:39 AM
|
| |
Not really. That was my starting kit 43 years ago (f2.0 lens though) . Enjoy and take as many pictures as you can afford!
|
