Forum: Lens Sample Photo Archive
04-10-2015, 10:59 AM
|
|
You make me want to name my lenses...lol. :lol: :lol:
|
Forum: Lens Sample Photo Archive
04-10-2015, 01:23 AM
|
|
I thought the Pentax-A 20mm ƒ/2.8 was your "Special Lady"? ;)
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
02-13-2014, 10:46 AM
|
|
Good call. (; |
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
02-13-2014, 01:21 AM
|
|
I ran across an article on old Leica advertisements. One on the M4 reads: "This 'pro' doesn't boast electronic circuitry. It doesn't have photocells to select the area of interest. No little indicators to tell you there's not enough light. The Leica M4 is strictly for those of you who prefer to do your own thinking, your own creating. As long as creativity can't be computerized, we will continue to make it."
It's interesting. In the rangefinder community, people value the low-tech "Think Camera" style: Leica Ms, Zeiss Ikons, and Voightlander Bessas are perfectly acceptable cameras. More to the point, people are more willing to pay a premium for a lack of certain features in the rangefinder community. But in the SLR community…the attitudes are different, and simplicity isn't valued quite as much. It's strange.
No matter what: I am glad to find myself in good company through this thread. ;)
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
02-07-2014, 09:01 PM
|
|
You're afraid of breaking a camera known for decades-long durability? Go get your K1000 CLAed and go shoot something!
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-21-2014, 09:36 PM
|
|
Excellent! How long ago did you do it? Also…does it shed?
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-13-2014, 11:42 PM
|
|
Well…sure: if the K1000 weren't the perfect camera for the job, people would've found another camera to do that job (probably the KM or some Nikon offering). That doesn't detract from the K1000's merits or make it hard to compare to other K-series and M-series cameras. Also, I don't think Pentax continued to manufacture these cameras only because the production costs were low—it makes sense to say that was part of their decision, but not the main reason.
I think the K1000 owes its success to the fact that it is an extremely simple camera, and lots of folks love(d) that.
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-09-2014, 07:50 PM
|
|
Yes. When I use my partner's OM-1n, I always feel like there are so many features for such a small package—and that's just the kind of thing I'd want to get away from.
I envy her though: that was her first film body, and it was used by two of her sisters for a long time before it came back to her. The camera has personal history to it, and it's also a great camera, so why switch? I wouldn't: personal history is more important to me than my camera preferences.
For me, I guess I have to make the decision myself, and I have to impart my own personal history on it, and so I figure choosing a camera is pretty important to starting that history. I suppose the K1000 embodies the kind of person I want to be and the kind of style I'd like to have. The K1000 is simple, unassuming, and relatively featureless—and somehow it still spurs debate about it's merits (or lack thereof). That's the sort of personality I think I want, the kind of photography I want to do, and—dare I say—the life I want to lead.
I'm rambling at this point, though…
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
01-09-2014, 09:49 AM
|
|
Trying out my A 24mm ƒ/2.8. It's pretty awesome, I'd say. |
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-08-2014, 09:53 PM
|
|
Thanks for letting us know! (I knew someone out there had to have done it. I mean—I hear they used wool in older cameras, so I figured someone must've tried it in their newer Pentax/Olympus/Canon/Nikon SLRs.) How long has it lasted so far, and why do you use felt instead of foam? :)
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-08-2014, 01:37 AM
|
|
Yes! That's quite the beauty. The person who posted that said they got their camera enamel painted at a camera shop in upstate NY, but they don't say where or how much it cost.
That's how I feel with my Rolleicord and my Zorki 4. Love the Fed 3 too! :)
Also, auto exposure is definitely a pain. Not only do I have to predict how the computer will try to expose the scene, I have to give it instructions that correct how it's going to expose the scene? I just find it easier to meter and set exposure myself. I'm not very quick at it, but I think it's important to take the time to think about what look I want to achieve with the exposure.
Yeah! That sounds right: I wouldn't buy a K1000 expecting accessories, features, etc. Honestly, I bought the MX so that I could have those features available to me. If that's what you need, the MX is definitely a great fit.
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-07-2014, 12:27 PM
|
|
Evil. (;
Alright. Since this thread is all about preferences, here are a few of my own.
I am easily distracted, so I've found that I don't like seeing anything in the viewfinder beside the meter and the image. For that reason, I like the centering needle over the match needle system—I don't want to see the speeds, and I would rather look at a single needle.
I also don't like the MX LEDs as much because they're sometimes ambiguous; I confuse +1 and -1 for a split second sometimess. (On more modern SLRs and dSLRs, there is often an LED "scale" that is always illuminated, so there is no ambiguity.)
The K1000 feels like it has the right size, heft, and grip. I like that there are no controls for me to fiddle with (remember: I am easily distracted, so I do fiddle), and that also means a better grip.
The biggest problem with the K1000: it doesn't come in black. ;)
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-07-2014, 07:20 AM
|
|
Ha! You must have an awesome family. ;)
So the KX screen is better than the MX screen? Is it ground glass with a microprism circle? Or does it have a split prism focusing aid?
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-05-2014, 07:29 PM
|
|
Sure. But could a person use felt?
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-05-2014, 04:51 PM
|
|
Yes, Jon makes great kits. Even still: I want to know if felt can do the job.
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-05-2014, 02:12 PM
|
|
Thanks for all the replies! :D
Well, I think the advantage is that I will not need to worry about the felt turning into mush the same way the foam does. Also, I've found that, in other applications, felts can have a nice sound-dampening effect. I imagine this might make the mirror slap a little less of a a schink and more of a thud. I wouldn't know because no one seems to have tried.
I've seen foam hold onto dust and lint too. There are a few times I've had to blow junk out of the foam bumper. I've never had dusty negs because of it, though. Lucky me, I suppose.
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-05-2014, 03:48 AM
|
|
Hey folks…I've searched high and low for an answer to this question: is it alright to replace an SLR's mirror dampening foam with a piece of felt? It seems to me that felt would last a lot longer than foam, and I'd avoid having to keep an eye out for when the foam inevitably turns into tar/gloop/crud/mayhem.
I've read mixed opinions about doing this: some warn that felt fibers might come loose and get into the camera's shutter mechanism, and others say their cameras are a-ok with a felt dampening pad. From what I can tell there aren't a lot of people who have tried felt instead of foam. Have any of you? What are your experiences?
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-04-2014, 12:18 AM
|
|
Yeah—some K1000's go for way more than I think they're worth. Even still, I've seen K1000 prices swing wildly…so it's possible to catch it for a deal. So, I presume people prefer the KX to the MX for the mirror lockup feature and added heft in the hands?
Right! I learned photography on a Nikon FM, and I never kicked those habits. I shoot everything in manual mode if possible. :)
Thanks for making me feel like I'm not nuts. lol. I think the K-size does fit me better—not only that, I just like the way the film advance, speed dial, and shutter feels on the K1000. I'll keep an eye out for another K-style body, preferably something in black. ;)
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-03-2014, 04:50 AM
|
|
Hey folks! I have a question for you all, but it requires a little backstory. So, here it goes…
About two years ago, I decided to move from a digital body (a dying *ist D) to film body. After lots of research, I decided I would go with the MX: it is fully mechanical, it has a lot of nice features, and it is really small. It just seemed like a rugged, reliable camera. I bought one from the local camera shop—complete with a CLA/overhaul, 1-year warranty, and original manual—and I fell in love.
Last weekend, my partner went to Value Village and bought a K1000 SE and SMC-M ƒ/1.7 for $20. She said it looked like such a good deal that she couldn't pass it up. She was right: it is in excellent condition. But after cleaning it up and playing around with it a bit, I'm starting to believe I like this camera body more than my MX. The K1000 doesn't have that wonky shutter-button activated meter that I had to repair on the fly once or twice; neither does it have that LED meter display that is sometimes hard to read ("Wait…it's orange…is that +1 or -1?"). I don't use the exposure info in the viewfinder, I don't use the self-timer, and I definitely don't use the DoF preview. The film advance feels smoother on the K1000…almost like the Spotmatics I've gotten to try; and the K1000's shutter speed dial doesn't take as much force to move. I'm starting to believe that the K1000 is the better camera (at least for me). …but am I nuts for thinking that? I just keep thinking about Bojidar Dimitrov's short criticism of the K1000:
I guess my answer to him would be…no. I don't miss any of those conveniences. I'm not interested in nostalgia—I think I just want a basic camera with a meter on it. Am I alone on this?
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
11-30-2013, 03:08 AM
|
|
+1. Sometimes I wish I had the ƒ/1.7 instead of the ƒ/1.4.
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-29-2013, 02:51 AM
|
|
Wow. Really? The short zoom was the best? Pretty awesome. What'd you think of the A24ƒ/2.8? (I ended up going with that one… but I haven't scanned the negs yet.)
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-28-2013, 11:51 PM
|
|
Which 24mm did you end up going with?
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-22-2013, 04:08 AM
|
|
We should all try to get away from LBA when possible, I would think. (:
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-21-2013, 04:47 AM
|
|
Over a year later, I've finally assembled that kit. I went with Boriscleto's suggestion, and I found the A 24mm ƒ/2.8. I was very close to going with the 20mm ƒ/2.8, but it is expensive and makes me nauseous looking through it. Maybe one day I'll go that wide, I'm very happy with this lens for now. Thanks to everyone for the helpful comments and awesome support. (:
Here's the obligatory goofy picture of my new toys:
I'll post sample shots soon. Let's say in a couple weeks?
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-14-2013, 01:35 PM
|
|
Not you—I know all about your good lady. :)
—I was asking jqsk. :)
|