|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
07-09-2023, 02:34 AM
|
| |
The first camera I took pictures with, was my father's Agfa Ambi Silette, a rangefinder camera with interchangeable lenses.
The first camera I owned was a Pentacon Praktica EE2. I always liked interchangeable lens cameras, I had a preference for the SLR prinicple and I wanted the camera to offer auto exposure. The only affordable camera matching these requirements in late 1979 was the East German Practica.
In the beginning I was really proud of this bulky and ugly piece of Eastern Block engineering. But after it failed on me 3 times within 18 months, I replaced it by a ME Super in spring 1982.
Ever since then I've been a Pentaxian.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
06-19-2023, 11:59 PM
|
| |
This problem most likely is "the usual FA 80-320 problem": There is a small contact plate inside the mount end of the lens, which is screwed on plastic studs. These studs tend to break off after some years of operation.
I fixed 2 lenses with these problems following instructions I found years ago in some forums on the internet. I downloaded and reformatted these instructions back then. You can find them here:
Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.
Please mind that I do not own the copyright of this material, therefore I ask to refrain from distributing it. |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-22-2023, 11:34 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
04-22-2023, 12:25 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
01-06-2023, 05:20 PM
|
| |
Acutally, there are 2 version of this lens: Manual Focus and Autofocus. Both seem to be Cosina designs and exist in a number of different brandings:
MF Version:
Cosina 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 MC
Kalimar 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 MC
Phoenix 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 AF Zoom (Even though it says "AF" it is manual focus)
Phoenix MF 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 Zoom
Promaster Spectrum 7 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 MC
MC Soligor AF Zoom 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 (Even though it says "AF" it is manual focus)
MC Soligor Zoom 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5
Vivitar Series 1 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 Multi Coated
AF Version:
Cosina 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 MC (2 variants: black and silver)
Phoenix 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 AF Zoom (2 variants: black and silver)
Promaster Spectrum 7 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 MC (2 variants: black and silver)
MC Soligor AF Zoom 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5
Tokina AF 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 (Not confirmed that this really is a Cosina OEM lens, 2 variants)
Vivitar Series 1 19-35mm 1:3.5-4.5 MC Auto Focus Zoom (2 variants: black and silver)
These lenses are rare, but not super rare. All of them have the same optical design - with a little question mark on the Tokina versions. Tokina and Cosina did share some designs, but I am not sure about the 19-35. However I would not expect too much from a cheapo 1980ies ultra wide angle zoom....
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-70 & KF
12-31-2022, 12:49 PM
|
| |
I'm pretty sure that Tamron never made a 18-300 for K-Mount. They had a 16-300 (Model B016) and a 18-400 (Model B028), but both only for Canon, Nikon & Sony.
Tamron produced the following APS-C super-zooms for K-Mount:
Tamron AF 18-200mm 1:3.5-6.3 Aspherical LD XR Di II [Model A14]
Tamron AF 18-250mm 1:3.5-6.3 IF Macro Aspherical LD Di II [A018]
The 18-250 was also available as smc Pentax-DA 1:3.5-6.3 18-250mm ED AL [IF].
The smc Pentax-DA 1:3.5-6.3 18-270mm ED SDM is a sibling of the Tamron18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II PZD [B008], but the Tamron version was not available in K-Mount
Sigma produced:
Sigma Zoom 18-200mm 1:3.5-6.3 DC
Sigma Zoom 18-200mm 1:3.5-6.3 II DC HSM
Sigma Zoom 18-200mm 1:3.5-6.3 DC Contemporary
Sigma Zoom 18-250mm 1:3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM
Sigma Zoom 18-250mm 1:3.5-6.3 DC Macro HSM
Sigma 18-300mm 1:3.5-6.3 DC Contemporary
In general the Tamrons have a better reputation than the Sigmas. The Pentax 18-250 (and its Tamron sibling) are good performers given the extreme zoom-range. The 18-270 seems to suffer from more variances. Some owners praise its better performance compared to the older 18-250, others claim very soft performance especially on the long end. However it definitely has better AF performance than the 18-250.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
12-18-2022, 03:18 AM
|
| |
Well - at least in Europe the slide down was consistent for more than 4 decades. And there is a number of good reasons for it:
1. Asahi Optical had always been a company with R&D guys who followed their own belief rather than market demand. Many times they were the first to come up with something but failed to benefit from being the first.
2. By 1976 Asahi Optical was the last of the Japanese major brands to give up the M42 mount, when everyone else had realized that bayonet is faster and more suited for communication between lens and camera.
3. Although Asahi was the first to offer an autofocus system (ME-F), they fell behind when Canon and Minolta came with a radical, new AF-centered approach in the late 1980ies. Pentax's AF always was too conservative, rather slow and definitely not on par with Canon's ring motor solutions.
4. In 2001 desaster started to unfold: Ashai had been the first to present a 24x36mm DSLR. However, the Philips sensor failed to provide the image quality that was required at the high price-point. So they had to pull the emergency brake and go for APS-C.
5. When the *ist-D finally appeared on the market in 2003 it was a nice camera, undoubtedly superior to any other APS-C offering at that time. But how would you be able to catch up on lost market shares by offering a camera that is almost twice the price of your competitor(s)?
6. Whatever happened in the years since then, it was too little, too late.
There is one more aspect to it:
While Asahi and Olympus were camera companies that tried their luck in medical technology, Canon, Minolta, Ricoh, Konishiroku (Konica) and Kyocera (Yashica) became extremely successfuly in printing and copying technology. Canon soon became a universal and quite independent high-tech company with their own semiconductor development branch. Long story short, by 2000 everyone else was significantly larger than Asahi Optical and obviously had more money to spend on R&D as well as marketing.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 III
12-11-2022, 05:28 PM
|
| |
Hi Kobie,
let it be known, I really appreciate the work that you are doing. I wonder where you take the energy from to throw out 2 videos per week for such a small amount of subsribers,
Anyway, I'm one of the guys who tries to keep the K-mount page alive and therefore I'd like to encourage all the fellow Pentaxians to keep on doing what they are doing!
Warm greetings from Vienna, the heart of Europe ;-)
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
10-30-2022, 04:04 AM
|
| |
Although K-Mount was regarded to be an "open specification", I found only one document with a drawing of the bayonet: http://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4294829/4294829626.pdf
This document is written in Russian, but probably Google can help you. It looks like the document was used as reference for the Russian plants that produced K-mount compatible cameras and lenses.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
10-12-2022, 04:51 PM
|
| |
Well, Honeywell had been working on AF systems since the 1960ies and kept on filing patents through the 1970ies. By 1975 they had their "Visitronic AF" system ready for deployment and immediately started developing the successor, called TCL ("Through the Camera Lens") system.
I would reckon that any of the early AF systems, let it be Konica's C35AF, Canon's stand-alone 35-70 AF lens, Ricoh's and Chinon's 50mm AF lenses and especially Asahi's ME-F (and the likes of Canon, Nikon & Olympus) were "inspired" by Honeywell's research.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
07-23-2022, 05:06 PM
|
| |
In the 1980ies Asahi Optical tried really hard to confuse their customers. Hereafter I will only list the 70-200ish lenses:
(smc) Pentax-A series lenses:
smc Pentax-A Zoom 1:4 70-210mm (a design with a very good reputation)
Siblings (look exactly like the lens above, but surprisingly are labled as 70-200):
- MC Auto Zoom CPC Phase 2 CCT 70-200mm Macro 1:4
- MC Cosmicar Zoom 1:4 70-200mm
Pentax-A Zoom 1:4 70-200mm (a simplified design without super-multi-coating)
Siblings:
- Takumar-A Zoom 1:4 70-200mm
- MC Cosmicar Zoom 1:4 70-200mm
- MC Finex Zoom 1:4 70-200mm
- TOU/FiveStar MC Auto Macro Zoom 1:4 70-200mm
Takumar-A Zoom 1:4.5-5.6 70-210mm (obviously a rebadged Super Cosina 70-210mm 1:4.5-5.6)
(smc) Pentax-F series lenses:
smc Pentax-F Zoom 1:4-5.6 70-200mm (another design with a quite good reputation)
Pentax-F Zoom 1:4-5.6 70-200mm
Siblings:
- Takumar-F Zoom 1:4-5.6 70-200mm
- Takumar-F Zoom 1:4-5.6 70-210mm (another confusing 210 vs 200 labling, but they seem to share the same design)
A few comments:
In the 1980ies SLR sales were declining and one way of fighting this trend was selling bundles at an attractive price. From today's point of view it does not look good that Asahi recycled their well reputed "Takumar" brand for low-end-budget lenses. However, we also notice that as early as in the 1980ies Asahi started rebadging non-Asahi designs and in return started selling their designs to "sales brand" companies.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
03-27-2022, 03:52 PM
|
| |
I chose Pentax in 1982 for a reason: The ME-Super was the most affordable, most compact semi automatic SLR on the market. Since then I have always had Pentaxes in my bag. If I were forced to re-acquire my active system - I would probably look into changing to something really compact. 3+ kg for the K-1 with battery grip and the 70-200/2.8 make me think "will I be able to carry this beast in 10 years from now?
On the other hand none of the full-frame mirrorless systems would match my understanding of "really compact". I must confess that the OM-D system looks tempting. These are real cuties that look and feel like real cameras. BUT: The future there is a lot more uncertain than the future of Pentax. And adapting to a 2x crop factor would be a culture shock for me.
No, I think in the end I would find myself bying a brand new K-1 II with all the limiteds and the holy trinity. And my wife would again get the K-3 III with its holy trinity. The only thing I guess would be irreplacable is my FA* 200/f4 Macro...
|
|
Forum: Pentax Compact Cameras
03-20-2022, 05:16 AM
|
| |
It looks very much like the XG-1 is a technical sibling of the Kodak AZ522, which was designed and made by a Taiwanese/Chinese company called "Asia Optical". The company still exists today but ceased to offer complete cameras.
Anyway the biggest disadvantage of the XG-1 was the unability to shoot in RAW, which prevented me from acquiring one. Years later I inherited a Canon PowerShotSX 50 HS and compared it to K-3 II. Obviously the K-3 is by far superior - 12 vs 24 MPix, 6.2x4.6mm vs 24x16mm sensor size. Details, noise, contrast - the DSLR with a decent lens is a different class. However, in good light conditions and with the ability of using RAW, the Canon SX line is/was a compact and light weight option.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
09-23-2021, 04:19 PM
|
| |
Given all the stories of the 60ies I feel young...
I got a Praktica EE2 as Christmas present in 1979 and learned to hate it over the next 30 months for its bulky design and the inferior reliability.
Then, in June 1982 I went into a store and asked for advice on a new entry-level camera. The clerk put a Canon AE-1, a Minolta XG-1, an Olympus OM-10, a Yashica, a Nikon and the Pentax ME-Super on the desk. I told him "take away the Canon and the Yashica, I'm not interested in shutter priority. You can also take away the Minolta and the Nikon - too bulky. And sorry, Olympus - too expensive. However, this little ME-Super looks really cute!".
One year later came the Super A (Super Program), more than a decade later the Z1-P and the MZ-3 - and a bunch of digital bodies since 2010....
|
|
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
07-05-2021, 03:12 PM
|
| |
Finally. I tried to figure out Ed's username here in the forum for quite some time :confused:
now for the video:
I like it and I think I'm going to use gloves from now on.
What I found amazing is how fast the printer works. My non-professional Epson XP-960 takes a lot more time.
What surprised me is that Ed put the print into the sleeve a few minutes after printing. I'm always afraid of the ink not being dry enough, so I keep prints on a flat surface for several hours (usually for the night).
I derive that the difference between home printers and professional ones is bigger that I thougt.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
06-21-2021, 10:58 AM
|
| |
As opposed to others here I am convinced that this is a Cosina made 28mm. Everything (DOF indicator, focusing scale, shape, S/N marking starting with PK) perfectly matches the "Cosina 28mm 1:2.8 MC". But I have never came across a Cosina branded variant of this lens with this particular rubber. However, mostly in the UK, the Miranda branded version of this Cosina lens was sold in fairly large quantities in the early eighties.
Therefore I would guess Miranda 28mm 1:2.8 MC. I can provide pictures of the Cosina and Miranda version of the lens for comparison in a PM, but as I don't own the copyright of the pictures I prefer not to post them here.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
05-17-2021, 12:05 AM
|
| |
Xou hit the nail! At the time when these items were designed, there was no such thing as "post processing" - at least, as long as the copying was slide to slide. Back in '85 I was in a group of train spotters and it was our usual routine to copy each others slides one week after a spotting trip. We went through every issue with the slide copier that was discussed in this thread. And you had the additional complication, that slide-to-slide copying required a special "slide duplicating film" from Kodak, which prevented the copies to have too much contrast.
Anyway, in 85 your least concern was "will I have enough sharpness" - you were just glad that you had the possibility for duplicating at all :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
05-16-2021, 11:22 AM
|
| |
I confess, I never did it, because
A) I had only some 20 negative films compared to 15k slides
B) My Epson Perfection V550 performed quite well and the scan software (either Epson scan or Vuescan) is good in doing the negative/positive conversion and refreshing of faded colors
C) The handling of stripes in the slide duplicator is not convenient
D) There is no ICE dust removal... You won't believe it how many specks you find even though the material has been dusted off with compressed air immediately before the scan.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
05-16-2021, 09:45 AM
|
| |
Of course, buying a complete set is the hassle free approach. I have to say, I love the look of the complete set.
A few practical hints from a long time owner:
- Using the bellows/slide copier combo with APS-C is nearly impossible. I couldn't find any lens that allowed me a full coverage of the slide frame within the limits of the copier and the bellows.
- With the K1 theoretically it is easy - everthing (almost) as it was in analog times.
BUT: The K1 collides with the rear part of the bellows A (see again Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.). In order to circumvent this, you need a small extension tube. I use the smallest one from the Auto extension tube set K.
If you purchase another bellows, you might also encounter issues with the protuding part of the pentaprism.
Last but not least: If you want to use this combo for digitizing slides, you need a lot of time.... I prefer using a dedicated slidescanner which gives you the benefit of automatic dust removal. Only for the very few underexposed or otherwise problematic slides I set up the K1 with the bellows.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
05-16-2021, 07:23 AM
|
| |
Thanks, this is surprising. However, even if the shape of the X-rail is slightly different, it still be possible to attach a slide copier, but it may require milling or filing off some parts - see detailed pictures here Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.
Here is, where it gets complicated, unless you have a friend with a very well equipped mechanical workshop....
You need something to adjust the distance between the lens and the slide - and also, the slide must be held perfectly parallel to the focal plane of the lens, therefore I would see it as mandatory, to attach the slide copier on a pin or rail and attach this part firmly to the rail of the bellows.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
05-16-2021, 06:56 AM
|
| |
As a proud owner of a "Bellows A / Slide Copier A" set that I purchased as a student for some € 300 more than 35 years ago I look at the pictures of the Bellows Unit III and I see no reason, why it should be impossible to attach the slide copier A to a bellows III, unless they changed the threadsize of the front cover screw of the rail. It is clear that it would not fit on bellows II, as this earlier model had a completely different design, but the rails of bellows III, bellows K, bellows M and bellows A look like exactly the same. My reference for this statement: https://www.pentaxforums.com/accessoryreviews/pentax-bellows-unit-iii-k.html
BTW, bellows/slide copier M and A are mechanically identical for sure, I remember back in 1984 I insisted on ordering the A Version instead of purchasing the on-stock M version, just because I was so eager to have everything labelled "A" to match my "Super A" (US: Program Plus) and my smc Pentax-A lenses.
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
05-16-2021, 05:32 AM
|
| |
This lens definitely is a Cosina 100-300mm 1.5.6-6.7 MC Macro in KAF version. Since the front ring of the lens is not visible in the posted picture, it could be either in Cosina, Soligor or Vitacon branding (see details below).
AFAIK Cosina made 5 (or 6) different design variants of this lens:
- Black
- Black with "100-300 AF Zoom Macro Japan" inscription on the upper part of the barrel
- Black with diagonal knobs [I never saw a proof that this version existed in Cosina branding]
- Silver
- Silver with "100-300 AF Zoom Macro Japan" inscription on the upper part of the barrel
- Silver with "100-300 AF Zoom Macro Japan" inscription on the upper part of the barrel and diagonal rubber knobs
Version 1 was also available as:
- MC Soligor AF Zoom-Macro 100-300 1:5.6-6.7
- Vitacon 100-300mm 1:5.6-6.7 MC Macro
Version 3
- Tokina AF 100-300mm 1:5.6-6.7 (with diagonal rubber knobs)
Version 4 was also available as:
- Vitacon 100-300mm 1:5.6-6.7 MC Macro
- Vivitar 100-300mm 1:5.6-6.7 MC Auto Focus Zoom
Version 5 was also available as:
- Phoenix 100-300mm 1:5.6-6.7 AF Zoom
- Promaster Spectrum 7 100-300mm 1:5.6-6.7 MC Tele Macro
- Voigtländer Telomar 100-300 1:5.6-6.7 VMV Macro
Version 6 was also available as:
- Tokina AF 100-300mm 1:5.6-6.7
They also made a manual focus version of this lens, which appeared under different brandings:
- Cosina 100-300mm 1.5.6-6.7 MC Macro
- Exakta 100-300mm 1:5.6-6.7 MC Macro
- Phoenix MF 100-300mm 1:5.6-6.7 Zoom
- Ricoh Rikenon P Zoom 1:5.6-6.7 100-300mm Macro (different rubber)
- Vivitar 100-300mm 1:5.6-6.7 MC Macro Focusing Zoom
- Vivitar 100-300mm 1:5.6-6.7 MC Macro Focusing Zoom (inscription on the front end of the rubber)
I would not be surprised if you think, "well, I just wanted a simple answer..."
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-13-2021, 02:44 PM
|
| |
A few years back I had the chance to compare 3 different 80-320s, 2 black and a silver one. After reparing the faulty infinity focusing of the silver one, it turned out that the three copies behaved quite differently. One of the black was significantly better than the other black and the silver one. I would conclude, that the "plastic fantastic" 80-320s have significant variations between copies.
On the other hand I had a DA-L 55-300 which I replaced by a DA 55-300 which I finally replaced by a DA 55-300 WR - and honestly, there was no difference that caught my eye apart from the fact that I needed the WR for shooting in the desert.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
05-11-2021, 11:47 PM
|
| |
Yes, indeed this is a risk when disassembling Pentax zooms of the autofocus aera. Luckily one doesn't have to disassemble the 80-320 to such an extent when fixing the "A"-Problem. But this requires extensive investigation prior to the repair attempt...
|
