|
This thread is boring so I figured I'd post some (mostly) Pentax porn   From top left: Pentax ME Super, with M42 adapter and Auto-Rikenon 135/2.8, K1000 SE with SMC Pentax-M 28/2.8, P30t with SMC Pentax-A 50/2 SMC Pentax-M 50mm/2, SMC Pentax-M 135mm/3.5 SMC Pentax 35mm/3.5, Pentax P30n  S-M-C Takumar 135/3.5 with hood, Spotmatic F with SMC Takumar 50/1.4 Tamron Adapt-A-Matic 28/2.8 Most of this is the result of shopping on the really loving cheap. The Tamron was "broken", for example. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 02:25 on Aug 14, 2009 |
#
?
Aug 14, 2009 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 09:10 |
|
|
Where's the porn? Those just look like K-Mount lenses...
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2009 00:55
|
|
|
advion posted:Where's the porn? Those just look like K-Mount lenses... Paul MaudDib posted:SMC Pentax 35mm/3.5
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2009 01:39
|
|
|
About to pick up a busted ME to be a focusing screen donor for my K10D. It pains me to destroy an older film camera but the ME doesn't meter correctly anymore and since it has no useful manual mode to speak of that's the end of its' useful life  The focus screen will need to be cut down a little, thankfully I have access to the proper tools. Measure twice and cut once will definitely be the order of the day though. Will post a trip report and maybe some progress photos when I get it done!
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2009 14:03
|
|
|
Nice camera collection.  Anyone own an MZ-S? That's the one Pentax I've always been interested in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2009 22:00
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Not to say that the K7 isn't awesome or anything, but it seems (edit: to me) like a step backwards in ergonomics. honestly, i love the ergonomics of the K10/20D. The K7 looks too small for my hands and fingers. just got an old pentax f/2.8 28 mm lens for $80 and playing around with it. i'm not as happy as i thought i'd be. I dont have it on me but it had like 4/5 blades and something about them just doesn't make it as sharp as the fa-50 stopped down which i was hoping for.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2009 02:11
|
|
|
Well, the operation was a success. The brave donor's focus screen wasn't as clean or scratch-free as I had hoped though. I'm not sure what the hell the old owner did to it, but some parts of the matte side of the screen are smooth, almost as if the previous owner tried to clean it with something. Still, if I look past the one or two blemishes the new screen focuses REALLY well, appears to be SPOT on with what the sensor records, and appears to need no exposure compensation so far. It does have a tendency to black out half the split for reasons that I don't yet understand though am sure are pretty predictable. It's no replacement for a Katzeye, and since it's so manhandled I doubt I will use it for too long before I upgrade to a Katz with opti-brite treatment, but for now it's literally 100% easier to nail focus on what I'm shooting. Unfortunately I forgot to take photos of the procedure -- I was nervous enough digging around in my camera without worrying about waving another one around during the operation
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2009 03:00
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:just got an old pentax f/2.8 28 mm lens for $80 and playing around with it. i'm not as happy as i thought i'd be. I dont have it on me but it had like 4/5 blades and something about them just doesn't make it as sharp as the fa-50 stopped down which i was hoping for. I generally use the reviews on the Pentax Lens Review Database as a guide, but the F series seems to be WAY off. Every single prime above a 9.0? Really? The very best K/M/A lenses only barely make it above 9... I realize you can build a plasticky body with great optics, but I can't shake the nagging feeling that when they started cheapening up the bodies the optics suffered a little bit too. I feel like I should trust the FA/DA series more than the F. However, I haven't used any F or DA/FA lenses, so this isn't the voice of experience.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2009 05:48
|
|
|
I wonder how many people at PF actually go back and edit their reviews. I know I would have made an erroneous entry if I had posted after my first day with my CPC 70-200 f/4. "Pretty sharp wide open A++ WOULD BUY AGAIN!" + 2 days of actual usage outdoors, not on a tripod = "Pretty much unusable below f/8". Much as I love my MF lenses, I'm starting to think about investing in something sharper in the 70-200 range, which pretty much means a modern AF Sigma f/2.8 or something. How against-the-grain can you get
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2009 05:58
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I wonder how many people at PF actually go back and edit their reviews. I know I would have made an erroneous entry if I had posted after my first day with my CPC 70-200 f/4. A Pentax user seeing the light and buying autofocus lenses  Nah, I use Pentax more out of convenience than anything. There are tons of primes out there, they are CHEAP, and they are really pretty good. PK zooms from the era are pretty terrible. Nothing wrong with buying a modern lens, prime or zoom. It does raise the question of why you wouldn't just buy a Canon body, since it does the same thing as the Pentax with the K/M primes once you adapt it and then you get both the old Pentax primes and the capability for modern zoom. v  vexcept for weather sealing and IS 
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2009 06:11
|
|
|
I already have a Canon body, I just like the K10d more  It seriously feels so good in my hands, and I'm in no danger of outgrowing it any time soon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2009 06:38
|
|
|
I think my favorite lens is an old Vivitar 70-205mm that had some weird aperture guard that I had to take a hacksaw to in order to fit my K200D. Was that a different type of mount or just a dumb design flaw?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2009 18:35
|
|
|
Kazy posted:I think my favorite lens is an old Vivitar 70-205mm that had some weird aperture guard that I had to take a hacksaw to in order to fit my K200D. Hmm. That's pretty weird. Could it maybe have been an R-K mount lens? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentax_K_mount#R-K_mount
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2009 19:04
|
|
|
Anyone try using a Yashica TL with Pentax lenses? I've read it works well, and it seems like quite a deal as Yashica SLR bodies are a dime a dozen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2009 08:36
|
|
|
It looks like the Yashica TL is an M42 mount camera, so you'll be able to use any M42 screw lenses, including Pentax. I don't think there's any way to adapt K-mount lenses to an M42 body though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2009 08:44
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:It looks like the Yashica TL is an M42 mount camera, so you'll be able to use any M42 screw lenses, including Pentax. I don't think there's any way to adapt K-mount lenses to an M42 body though. There's not. The distance from the rear element to the focal plane is smaller in a K-mount lens and the barrel of the lens is bigger. Meaning you could adapt it but you'd lose infinity focus, and there's no way to make the lens sit down inside the mount a bit. Only thing to be careful of would be SMC/S-M-C Takumar lenses with the rear aperture arm. It shouldn't be a problem but I don't know for sure. Super Takumars would work for sure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2009 12:58
|
|
|
Darn. Different Pentax mount, then. I've used the K1000 a bit, but it seems like for people looking to get into manual 35mm SLRs there are probably cheaper choices. Both Olympus and Minolta MF lenses are significantly cheaper at most focal lengths, based on what little research I've done. It kinda seems like photo programs and "friends of a friend" have gotten the word out about manual Pentax cameras and driven the price up a lot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2009 16:28
|
|
|
M42 lenses are real bargains, as long as you can find them. Plus when you upgrade later you can almost certainly get an adapter to use them on higher end mounts. For what it's worth, I bought both of my Pentax MEs for $30 apiece. As far as glass goes, even with cheap(er) Pentax glass you'll get what you pay for. The cheap $10-20 glass is still going to be pretty low quality, though there are real sharp, fast bargains to be had for under $100. Zooms, not so much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2009 16:46
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:M42 lenses are real bargains, as long as you can find them. Plus when you upgrade later you can almost certainly get an adapter to use them on higher end mounts. Plus don't forget that you can buy a real M42 camera and they work great. Most M42 lenses have an aperture pin, meaning if you buy a camera designed for M42 you get a switch on the side of the camera that lets you focus full-open, flip the switch, meter, and shoot, then flip it again to refocus. It's like having a pre-set lens built into the camera. e: Disadvantage is that on some really old ones, they don't have meters and might need some cleaning up, and most don't modern fancy things like windows to let you see the film canister when it's loaded. Also, film only. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Aug 23, 2009 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2009 18:17
|
|
|
just want to jump in on the "YAY PENTAX" bandwagon - I bought a K200D and have had a lot of fun scouring ebay and KEH for cheap lenses. I even ended up getting an ME Super with a 50/1.7 in great condition for $50AU delivered! I will post some camera porn after the weekend, i'm going on a goon photo expedition. fun..
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2009 05:47
|
|
|
That's awesome. Hold onto that camera too, if you're interested in film. It's a great little body 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2009 06:13
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:That's awesome. Hold onto that camera too, if you're interested in film. It's a great little body Yeah, I run that combo too and it's awesome. Try and get a 28mm f/2.8 as well. The 50 and the 28 will cover almost everything you want to do. You can get an 80-200 f/4.5 for cheap too and that'll pretty much cover everything else.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2009 23:29
|
|
|
HPL posted:Yeah, I run that combo too and it's awesome. Try and get a 28mm f/2.8 as well. The 50 and the 28 will cover almost everything you want to do. You can get an 80-200 f/4.5 for cheap too and that'll pretty much cover everything else. hmm.. you mean something like this: http://www.keh.com/OnLineStore/Prod...028mm%20SMC%20A ?? Edit: Martytoof posted:Hmm. That's pretty weird. Could it maybe have been an R-K mount lens? I found this too with a Ricoh lens. luckily i found out the information before the lens was delivered so I didn't connect the lens to the camera until after i'd pulled the back off and removed the pin. other than that though i must admit it works pretty well. the lens feels very cheap and plasticy though. unicron fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Aug 27, 2009 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2009 04:38
|
|
|
unicron posted:hmm.. you mean something like this: Yeah. You don't need an -A lens because the ME Super won't be able to take advantage of it, though it won't hurt to have it either, so if you can save a few bucks by going with an -M lens, then do so. See if you can find one locally first though. You may find one at a decent price in the used section of a camera store since it's not exactly a super hot item. There are also lots of third party lenses by makers like Tokina or Vivitar that work well too and are nicely priced as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2009 04:55
|
|
|
Maybe it's just personal preference, but I find that 28 is a little too wide full frame for most of the photos I want to shoot. I'd be so much happier with a 35 instead. Conversely, the 28 is actually pretty close to perfect on the K10, coming to 42mm at 1.5x crop.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2009 05:06
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Maybe it's just personal preference, but I find that 28 is a little too wide full frame for most of the photos I want to shoot. I'd be so much happier with a 35 instead. Conversely, the 28 is actually pretty close to perfect on the K10, coming to 42mm at 1.5x crop. I use the 28mm for landscapes and photos in close quarters. It's also wide enough that it's good for street and street-style photography from the hip.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2009 05:13
|
|
|
I'm a complete newbie to photography and I'm completely clueless about lenses. I'm looking at buying a Pentax MZ-M with a SMC Pentax A 35-80mm F4-5.6 lens. I know some people prefer prime lenses, but are zoom lenses fine for a beginner and is this particular lens okay?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 12:23
|
|
|
The focal length is okay, but googling around reveals that this lens is pretty poorly received in terms of image quality. You might want to look into the Pentax-A 35-70mm F4 instead, but all their zooms seem to be a little lacking. I think for a beginner, a zoom lens is actually preferable to a prime. If you're just starting out you might not know what focal range you want to shoot just yet, so having some room to play can't be a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 19:20
|
|
|
It's hard to in wrong with a 50mm lens on a film camera. They cheap, fast and very useful. Just like your mom.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 19:27
|
|
|
Kazy posted:I think my favorite lens is an old Vivitar 70-205mm that had some weird aperture guard that I had to take a hacksaw to in order to fit my K200D. I had this and it was a pretty good lens but I bought the FA 80-200mm and I ended up giving it to a friend of mine. I don't think it was an RK mount so it was just dumb design. Martytoof posted:Maybe it's just personal preference, but I find that 28 is a little too wide full frame for most of the photos I want to shoot. I'd be so much happier with a 35 instead. Conversely, the 28 is actually pretty close to perfect on the K10, coming to 42mm at 1.5x crop. I just got an F 28 mm which isn't working right. It doesn't stop down when I shoot it and it normally doesn't stop down in the DOF preview. Also, the focus light pops up even when it isn't in focus. I've had plenty of other manual focus lenses for my K10D but this one is really frustrating. I want to get a 35 or 28 mm prime or the DA* 16-50-but the old FA primes are really rare and the new primes in that range are more expensive than the zoom lens. I really don't know how to go about it. That said, on the really wide side the DA 12-24 F4 ED is probably the best lens I have.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2009 20:57
|
|
|
Some rear end in a top hat stole all my stuff so I'm starting over. Currently eyeing up a K7 + Pentax 15mm f/4 and Sigma 30mm f/1.4 kit. I still have a 70mm f/2.4 for the tele. Any better options? Going for low size and weight so big ultrawide zooms are out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2009 19:29
|
|
|
there's a few FA-35 left through amazon and occasionally pentax forums. i'm going to pick one up sometime soon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2009 20:14
|
|
|
I am eyeing right now a FA 28mm f2.8 to get something resembling "normal view", does someone have experience with it? One thing stopping me is that I was considering getting the Tamrom 17-50mm f2.8 but I don't think I would be able to use that one with the film body I plan to acquire in a couple of months... any advice would be welcome. Edit: The FA would be used and costs half of what I'd pay for the Tamrom new.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2009 02:42
|
|
|
Nope, you wouldn't be able to use the Tamron on a film camera. It's a very nice zoom - constant f/2.8, great IQ. The prime would probably be great, and would work on a film body, but you obviously can't zoom. It would be a normal-ish on a digital SLR and a wide on a film SLR. It looks like they're a little soft wide open but great after f/4. Here's Pentax Lens Review's take, looks like it's fairly popular: http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/showproduct.php?product=199&cat=30 But the Tamron is a great zoom that's probably just as good as that prime, just not for film. I haven't used either of these, but the Tamron is the go-to for a step up after the kit lens because it's awesome and pretty cheap. It's really up to you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2009 02:49
|
|
|
After using my old 28mm/f3.5 Super Takumar from my Spotmatic (screwmount!) on my K10D this weekend, I'm really itching to get a wide-angle prime to play around with. Is there such a thing as an old Pentax lens in the 14mm to 18mm range that I can find cheaply?
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2009 03:48
|
|
|
You're probably not going to find anything that wide cheaply, especially if you're interested in something that is rectilinear. Maybe some older M42 fisheyes, but it's still likely going to cost you a bundle
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2009 05:19
|
|
|
Haha. Not really cheap, but there are some fisheyes in the 17mm range (Fish-Eye-Takumar/Pentax). If you find a Birds-Eye-Pentax (8mm) cheap I want it 
Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 05:25 on Sep 8, 2009 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2009 05:22
|
|
|
ryangs posted:After using my old 28mm/f3.5 Super Takumar from my Spotmatic (screwmount!) on my K10D this weekend, I'm really itching to get a wide-angle prime to play around with. Is there such a thing as an old Pentax lens in the 14mm to 18mm range that I can find cheaply? Zenitar 16mm 2.8 It is a fisheye too. It is available in both m42 and k-mount of which I hear the K-mount is better. Have seen it on beay at around 200 or used for quite a bit less.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2009 08:21
|
|
|
Man, this new economy sucks. I remember seeing those Zenitars on ebay for about $110 NIB from the supplier. Oh well. I tried a K7+30mm on the weekend and I'm sold. Going to flog most of my remaining lenses and get that pair plus the DA 15mm f/4 for a 15mm, 30mm, 70mm kit. And maybe an old Pentax-A 24mm f/2.8 just for fun.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2009 09:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 09:10 |
|
|
In a similar vein, I'm ready to accept that the lenses I bought for less than $50 are actually crap, no matter how rose coloured my glasses are. Next purchase will be a Tammy 70-200 2.8 to replace my terribly CA'd CPC 70-200 f/4, and then maybe a wide end zoom. You'd think after all this I'd regret going Pentax for digital since the lens selection is so much better on Canon, but I literally love handling and using my K10 so much that I'm willing to keep at it. Edit: But seriously, this camera rocks
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2009 14:19
|
|