NEW EMAIL ADDRESS + back from web-only pdml
Hi all friends, I have changed my mail provider and created an account exlusively for use with PDML, so I can get back from the nomail option and receive and reply to pdml instantenously (well, as far instantenously as dial-up connection permits). For more than 6 months I have been on the nomail list option because my mail account couldn't handle the 200 mails/day flame wars etc ;-) I am looking forward to be able to read and respond without so much lag - the web archive of PDML was in a big mess so far, the DATE index lagging about a month behind (sic!), and the THREAD archive is about 5-7 days behind at times. My former email is [EMAIL PROTECTED], which is no longer reliable so I switched. You can still send personal mails to it, though. List only address is now SONNAR, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (you can see I love old lens designs, sonnar is still very capable lens type). I will post a message from there shortly. Thanks! Frantisek Vlcek P.S.: after about 2 years on PDML from which the last half year was through web only I missed direct participation all those 6 months. Replying to thread which is 3 - 5 days old and waiting for your reply and subsequent messages take another 3-5 days to be visible is not nice. But the mail-archive is great, nevertheless... Free, after all! Back again! Great! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: K2 shutter vibration question
*** However, I keep hearing that its (Seiko-sha?) metal focal plane shutter induces a fair amount of vibration [see typical excerpt below]; this would sort of defeat the whole idea of MLU (which is the main reason I am thinking *** Yes, the vibration of the shutter is very strong. It can be even felt when handholding the camera. I got the K2DMD just for the MLU, which is lacking in almost anz other body except KX and LX. However, the K2 has more sources of vibrations... it§s not a body I would pick for its vibration-free operation now, I would use a KX or LX. But I dont have LX or KX, so I have to use mz K2DMD. Sources of vibration: Mirror. MLU solves this only PARTIALLY! The mechanism used for springing mirror up before exposure IS NOT COMPLETELY TURNED OFF when MLU is used!!! So it justs springs in vain, but inducing serious vibration nevertheless. Its better than without MLU, though. IMHO, this vibration of this source is STRONGER when the MLU is used!!! But as the mirror itself induces even more vibration, it§s still better to use MLU than not. Aperture. The aperture activating lever IS NOT TURNED OFF WHEN MLU is used. Another strong source of vibration. Holding in the DOF preview button makes it even worse, so it cannot be solved. Shutter. Even the shutter makes slight vibration, but in effect, it§s the smallest of those other sources. I can see the effects of these vibrations when I put the camera on tripod and put a glass with water on the camera, then use selftimer to trigger the shutter. Even with MLU, there are waves apparent on the surface of water. And I can see it in pictures, especially with long lenses. So fo extra long lenses, big wooden tripod is necessity. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
quality of Sigma 2.8-3.5/75-200
Hi! I have the opportunity to buy at relatively good price this lens (sigma 2.8-3.5/75-200) in K-A mount (not AF). It would close the gap I have but at a price much lower than good 2.8 zooms (I wanted a 2.8/80-200 tamron adaptall lens, but none are available any near Europe, and shipping fom USA is too much with most dealers using only UPS) What is the optical quality of this lens? Is it comparable to at least some of the 2.8 zooms? Or to Series 1 3.5 lens? or Tamron SP 3.5 lens? What is the mechanical construction? (from pics looks better than AF sigmas). It's not small lens, it has 67mm filter ring, but looks some parts are plastic on the pic. Is it true? What about vignetting wide open, sharpness wide open? Thanks a lot for any information. Please carbon copy your reply to my personal address at [EMAIL PROTECTED], I get only web version of PDML which lags 2-3 days behind often. Regards, Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
quality of Sigma 2.8-3.5/75-200
Hi! I have the opportunity to buy at relatively good price this lens (sigma 2.8-3.5/75-200) in K-A mount (not AF). It would close the gap I have but at a price much lower than good 2.8 zooms (I wanted a 2.8/80-200 tamron adaptall lens, but none are available any near Europe, and shipping fom USA is too much with most dealers using only UPS) What is the optical quality of this lens? Is it comparable to at least some of the 2.8 zooms? Or to Series 1 3.5 lens? or Tamron SP 3.5 lens? What is the mechanical construction? (from pics looks better than AF sigmas). It's not small lens, it has 67mm filter ring, but looks some parts are plastic on the pic. Is it true? What about vignetting wide open, sharpness wide open? Thanks a lot for any information. Please carbon copy your reply to my personal address at [EMAIL PROTECTED], I get only web version of PDML which lags 2-3 days behind often. Regards, Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: lens brightness
Hi all. As I am reading threads with two days lag (the web version is _that_ slow), it all might have been answered already. I address the issue of bellows factor and its difference in tele or wideangle slr lenses, as well as T stop. 1) f/stop can't be just focal length/front diameter, because front diameter is much larger in retrofocus wideangles (my 2.8/20 has ~65mm dia, but it isn't f/0.3 lens g). Also, to even more complicate it, f/stop isn't just physical diaphragm/aperture opening dividing focal length... I can't find the exact calculation at the moment, but I remember that it included such values like entrance pupil diameter and exit pupil diameter, and that the diaphragm diameter wasn't included directly! 2) T/stop (true transmission, in practice, than only computed, theoretical, geometrical transmission). It is measured not computed. e.g. one 4/400mm movie lens was stated as T/4.5 transmission stop. It is slower because of light losess at each air-glass surface (due to reflectance of uncoated glass, even SMC glass reflects some light). With formula on Boz's KMP, we get at least 5% loss of light in complex 2.8 pro zoom (usually 12 groups or more), with SMC. With advances in SMC this might be less. That's T/2.94 instantly. Add to it manufacturers tolerances (about 5% too), and 2.8 lens might test actually as 3 (like some 300mm are tested to be less, ~280mm). 3) with retrofocus and tele designs, the usuall formula for close up loss of light changes too (or rather we should use formula with this in mind). Normally, lens losess 2 stops at 1:1 magnification AFAIK. With tele designs, lens loses up to 1.5x more! (this is often cured by using some IF design, which sometimes lessens the focal length). OTOH, retrofocus (wide) lenses loose less light at 1:1 ! Maybe just 1 stop compared to normal 2 stops. That's because again, the entrance and exit pupils come into it. Entrance pupil of telephoto lens is large, but exit pupil is small. Vice versa in retrofocus wideangle lens. The entrance divided by exit (or vice versa?) pupil diameter is in the proper equation for loss of light with closer focus than infinity. So a plain tele lens without any fancy IF or REAR design might loss even almost stop at very close portrait distance. Example would be old 4/300 (not *) SMC K, or K 5.6/400 lenses. If I find the proper formulas, I will post them, but I guess they must be in any good photo encyclopaedia or on web (my focal press encycl. is now packed away in crates, as is majority of my library :( Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: AF converter together with AT-X 100-300?
Mark wrote: I did not take any actual pictures to test the quality of this combo. I have tried using my ATX with teleconverters, and have not been happy with the results. I'll also break from the consensus here and say that I don't consider the 1.7 AF converter to be all that good. When I combine mine with a 50mm f1.4, point it at a bright shiny object in the sun, and de-focus I see all sorts of wild rainbow / prism patterns. This is consistent with different lenses. Mark, this has nothing to do with the converter. It's simply the nature of the focusing screen in newer AF cameras, where the whole screen is of very small micro-prisms. After one aperture (e.g. 6.8 in my SFXn's screen), some optical effects make this rainbow patterns happen. When I wrote about it here, I was accused of smoking some dope :) Especially at f/8, these rainbow hues are much apparent. Pentax should have marketed it ;-) It is also apparent in bokeh/defocused areas, there is visible horizontal rainbow lines. So I guess this is because of the camera, not converter. Frantisek BTW, how do you like the lens, mainly wide open, at long end? Compared to a long prime?Thanks. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
TC - Kenko AF 1.5x - Slooow and buzzing AF?!?
Hi, I found today the SHQ teleplus Kenko AF 1.5 convertor for Pentax AF for a great price used, close to 25$! in near-mint state. I tried it out on my current only AF lens, F 1.4/50 and SFXn af body, and it produces awfull whirring/buzzing sound when AF-ing! This sound (only less high-pitched) is porduced even if manually focusing (as the gears inside the TC still move). Is this normal? Also, it AFes strangely - overfocuses about 20% distance than focuses back right on. A new AF 1.5 SHQ was the same! A sigma AF 1.4x was even worse - couldn't af at all! It just hunted, overshot, again, than maybe it caught focus on 5th try. And with the 1.5x kenko, AF is very slooow! About 2 seconds from closest to infinity - the ring rotates much more slowly than without the TC. Is this normal too? Is my SFXN's af motor just plain sloow? It drives the 1.4/50 without TC just fine (of course much more slowly than Z1p I tried out one day). I planned to use the TC for manual focus lenses anyway, and it's fine for that (all A pins, modern multicoating, ... for 25$). It works very fine for manual focus on an old Pentacon 4/300 or Sonnar 2.8/180. But someday, I will perhaps have a more modern AF body with other AF lenses than just 50mm, so I would like to know if this TC is slow and buzzes with any body and lens or just mine old body (SFXn g). Thanks! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Tokina SL 400 mm f5.6
Doug wrote: I have the SD version of this lens in PK-A mount, but I haven't tried it yet. I'll be trying it out the first weekend of October, if there's room in by bag. I've been using an SMC 400/5.6, so that will be benchmark against which I'm judging the Tokina. TTYL, DougF Doug, when you get around to trying it, please post your results here. I am much interested how a semi-modern SD/LD/APO tele compares to an older much simpler tele design I think the SMC K 400/5.6 is according to Boz. Resolution wise and contrast-wise. I found some older non-SD teles to have good performance, but that was stopped down a bit (1-2 stops), and actually the lens was for 6x6cm format 4/300mm Pentacon (it's a damn best for the money lens for 6x6cm you can get, it doesn't cost like a car or house g). good light! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT- friends enemies
\in response to Scooterman's message, as quoted after my reply\ Why don't you go take a cold shower, Scoot. I wanted to refrain from talking politics not only on this list but especially now. So why don't you do the same? I hope you are just out of your senses and reason when you wrote this. Such words as yours sound very,very much like the words of those terrorists. By _your_ reasoning as rephrased by me below, today's attacks at US are made legitimate, because Afghan terrorist murdered innocent civilians [undoubtable, except the Afghan now]. Thus, kill all Afghans [or wahtever country]. The terrorists thought just the same: US, their secret services, or US corporations caused deaths of many innocent people [flame me if you want but not on this list. I stay behind what I wrote but it doesn't belong here]. Thus, kill all US. Don't you see it? It's the same! It's a tragedy, and I feel very sorry for the people there. I have friends there too, PDMLers and others. I was very afraid for all of them. I don't condone terrorism at all, it's ugly and evil and wrong, but words as yours only give the terrorist a reason. Frantisek Scoot wrote: Some folks were waxing poetic on Afghanistan... http://www.maptown.com/geos/afghanistan.html We sent them over 70Mil in aid in 1997 Plus all the NATO aid the Johnny do-good aid re: removing mines etc. Only 12% of the country has arable land. 46% is pasture... ARID pasture (it's a freaking desert). Maybe we need to KEEP that aid money... and IMNSHO, spend it on getting rid of most of the bombs left over from 'Nam/Desert Storm carpet bomb em till not a blade of grass is left; then send in the Marines to salt the soil. Their #1 export is opium for christ's sake... #2 appears to be terrorist training grounds. A bunch of flea-bags wearing rags in a desert country that's smaller than0 Texas trying to piss in someone else's cereal? Then cheer when upwards of 10,000 die? Excuse me??!! Screw em long, hard, repeatedly. Scoot - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Focsing screens interchangeability
Hi, to start a Pentax issue, I would like to ask those members with focusing screens (removable g), if they could measure such. I got the idea from a PDMLer here who ordered MZ-M split-image-aid screen and put it into his MZ-5n (BTW, is your spot-metering working with the splitscreen? I assume it should work well, in many cameras the spot reading is done through the mirror, so _before_ any focusing screen. Strange that it affected Z1's spot). I have SFXn (SF1n) which has removable screen, and would much like to put there a screen with split-image aid. The SFXn's bright-matte screen is great for focusing on near objects like 1-5m, but awful at focusing near infinity (even with 2.8 lenses). Best would be a modern bright-matte screen with split-image center aid. I wonder if maybe the other screens would fit, maybe the MZ-M's ? My screen has the following dimensions - 3.49mm x 2.44mm (aprox.). Could you please measure your MZ-M screen you ordered (or the MZ-5n's screen you put out, they should be same dimens.) ? And those with the LX screens, could somebody give me the measures? Thanks a lot. The modern brightscreen with center focusing aid would be just _great_. I need split-image for landscapes and near-infinity focus (with tele lenses, 500mm, I have'nt yet seen a landscape that would allow me to hyperfocus. There's no such thing as hyperfocus in 5.6/500mm mirror tele). Frantisek P.S. as again, please CC your message directly to me. I am very fond of PDML and always can't wait the 2 days which is currently the lag of the WWW version behind the direct mail one. But unfortunately I can't get the mail one, it would ruin my private life ;) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
All ok?
It was terrible watching the news. I couldn't believe it at first. List people in NYC W - are you ok? I hope you and your relatives are all alive and unharmed. Although I don't have much love for many aspects of US policy and government, I think US caused many wrongs, but this striking at US symbols which led only to many death and suffering is truly appaling. I feel sorry for all of you. Please, stay level headed howewer hard it is. Eye for an eye has never ended anything. I admire those on the list who are such level-headed. It's easy to write if I am only watching it on tv. With sympathy Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
quality: TOKINA 2.8/24-40 ATX
Hi PDMLers! anybody has please experience with this lens, mainly wide open performance? I came upon a nice example with only a dented filterring, but can't test it beforebuying. Can you compare to a Pentax prime if you owned both? To 24/2 or 2.8/24s? Wide open? Stopped down? Maximum enlargement wide open with nice look? Thanks a lot! this zoom would be nice to go under my 1.4/50 and 2.8/180 for general photography, I lack now anything wider than 50mm for K mount (yes, the 20mm flektogon _is_ nice, but try to do low-light stuff with it or reportage with it! manual stop-down only on K body) Note, please CC your reply to my personal address, the web archive is quite slow at times (I read PDML only on the web) Best regards, Frantisek Good light! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: CZJ 80/1,8 with K mount?
I think I`ve got wrong informations and this lens was made by Pentacon (I think former CZ Dresden). If it's a 1.8/80, it's _certainly_ made by Carl Zeiss Jena, which was part of the famous Carl Zeiss before war (and most lenses of CZ were made there in Jena I think), and later sacked by USSR armies (hence the many copies of Carl Zeiss lenses by USSR companies, like the 2/85 Jupiter-9, 2.8/35mm Jupiter-12, etc which are clones of classic Zeiss lenses). German Democratic Republic made CZJ a V.E.B. (a Communist type company), later merged with VEB Pentacon. CZJ continued to make very high quality lenses even in GDR, made military equipment too so it had to be best quality. The famous Zeiss Mirotar 5.6/1000 mirror lens covering 6x6cm format (!) was cloned and continued in production in CZJ, so the Spiegelreflex objektive aus Jena as was the CZJ clone called due to (c) reasons is now relative more common than the Zeiss Mirotar. There were even connections between Zeiss and Pentax, not only some lenses like 3.5/15 and 2/28 and SMC, but also the K mount as some say. The same experts say negotiations were under way similar to todays Zeiss-Yashica relationship, and Pentax was supposed to supply bodies like Yashica now does. If it indeed is in K mount, please check how does the lens look. B mount, as used by VEB Pentacon on B series Prakticas, is very similar to K mount (some say it's a copy, that Pentax refused to license K mount to Pentacon). But B mount uses electric contacts to tell selected aperture to the body, so it lacks the mechanical aperture linkage lever. Adapting would be IMHO possible, but metering wouldn't work (it would meter only widest aparture) (auto-aperture-stopdown _would_ work though, as the aprrtre stopdown lever works same on B as K). It can be adapted from M42 1.8/80, then it would say PANCOLAR on the lens barrel. The B versions says PRAKTICAR on the lens barrel, but both are same lens. Here in Hungary it's about 14000-2HUF, aprox. 50-70USD. I've seen some above $200 on eBay... Gabor Now, Gabor, I am going to Hungary this moment! Even here in Czech republic they are more than double your amount! And the prices rise... Is the price real? Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
my Metz 35 CT-2 experience...
Hi, this is mostly for archives, if somebody is asking about good and cheap and powerful TTL flash in the future he can just read this g so we can concentrate on more important threads like Chemical vs. Digital; Paal/Pel/Pol; What is Pentax ;-)). About an inexpensive but powerful and very capable flash. As I couldn't find any web information on the flash when I was deciding if to buy it, I wrote this for others who might be seeking info on it. I got the 35ct2 after I sold a Sunpak big handlemount flash which was just too big and heavy for lugging around. Coming from a GN 45 (m) (@ 35mm lens coverage) flash I wanted a powerful flash but _smaller_ than the big Sunpak G4500DX/AT555. The 35ct2 has GN 35 (m) at 35mm lens (in reality slightly wider coverage, around 30mm), which is same as Vivitar 283 and other highly regarded flashes. The GN 35 flash is about 0.7 f/stop less powerfull than GN 45 potato-masher style flash, but much easier to carry around. In fact, it is as powerful as 40MZ or Pentax 500FTZ, only lacking a zoom head (which is used to inflate GN. 500FTZ's GN 50(m) is stated at 85mm zoom, Metz's GN 40 is stated at 50mm zoom. Ages old flash standard coverage for computing GN is 35mm lens). On modern cameras, AF assist, 2nd curtain, program flash, fill-in program flash (depending on camera), maybe more, all should be possible with SCA adapter 374 AF/2. I have to check this though when I get the 374 :). Only problem is this flash uses flashead which has filterholder not compatible with MZ series flashes, thus more limited filter accessories (only ND filters and Wide - 28mm - were made I think). All 300 series and some 3000 series accessories which mount on SCA shoe are usable, even powergrip G15 (which allows for connection of 3000 series adapter! Yup, the flash sits on barefoot G15, and from G15 a 3000C cord goes to SCA 3000/3002 adapter on camera's hotshoe. Unlike the Metz's MZ series, the CT and CL series flashes' GN is for 35mm coverage, thus you can immediately see the flash's power by seeing its number - 32 CT has GN 32, 35 CT has GN 35, 45 CL has gn 45. User interface - very simple. Switch for mode selection - 3 auto (f2,f4,f8 apertures at 100 iso), manual, ttl. Above it is Exposure OK Check light. At top of back panel is f/stop distance calculator, where you set iso and see instantly color-coded auto f/stops as well as maximum TTL/manual distance at any aperture. Better than fancy LCDs. There is also battery check button and light, fairly useful. Also a TEST button which fires the flash, near it is flash ready light. The on/off is little strange, there are two separate buttons for On and Off, making accidental Ons a little easier :(. At least the flash has auto-power-off in about 5 minutes of non-use, so it won't drain the batteries even if set in camera bag when On. I prefer sliding switches to buttons though. Head is tilt, up to 90 degrees, in these click-positions: straight, 60,70,80,90 degree. None confusing 30, 45 degree positions which I never used. The whole flash swivels for vertical bounces (the AF assist SCA and auto-sensor doesn't swivel, for obvious reasons). Recycle - from 4 AA NiCd 850mAh cells, recycle times are about 3 seconds on fresh batteries to 4 seconds average. With my 5 cell (rebadged from notebook) NiMH 3500mAh battery pack, recycle is only 1-1.5 seconds at full power!!! That's quick enough to overheat the flash if you do 20-30 full discharges without letting it cool down.So recycle times are very good. If I had 3500mah _NiCd_ cells (instead of NiMH) in the pack, recycle would be even shorter!!! Why I used 5 cell pack when flash is rated at 4 cells ? 5 rechargables roughly equate voltage of 4 alkalines, which have 1.5 voltage average compared to 1.2 average of NiMH/NiCd. Also, higher voltage combined with very good recycletime characteristics inherent in NiCd/NiMH (versus Alkalines, which have bad recycletime characteristics) gives me even lower recycletime than with 4 rechargables. Of course, it's maybe pushing the limits of the flash, but especially in older designs there was enough leeway I think. A big plus is that the circuitry used to make direct current into alternating current is very SILENT, with NO UGLY BUZZING SOUND as other flashes do, even if used with my battery pack! The Sunpak did a lot of buzzing... But even still the start of charging is audible, giving you audible confirmation of full discharge. That's good! I hated the buzzing, although it was very positive at times. Most Metzes are VERY rugged, my friend's 32MZ3 fell down from 2m on rocks, it broke open into two parts, he just clicked the shell into one part again and it worked again... Drawbacks - slightly strange separate on/off buttons which are somewhat easier to set on if not wanted than a switch. At least the flash has screensaver timer builtin. - absence of filters, especially tele-attachments. None were
my updated gallery, comments welcome!
Hi, I have just updated my web page with a more serious looking gallery, as well as new coat. Although there are now just several BW landscapes and such, the major template work is done, so more will follow quickly. Comments on both pictures and web are not only welcome but required ;-) Just browse to: www.volny.cz/ffranta/newgallery the only now working link there is the galleries one. There you see thumbnails and click them for full versions. the old, much outdated and very quick-hacked version is still online at www.volny.cz/ffranta, but not much interesting :) Frantisek P.S.: I will upload the files at the same time as this message goes to the list (all by dial-up connection so I am writing it offline to save money), so I hope there are no problems when I connect to upload it. If there are, just try to visit the gallery few hours later, it will most propably be working. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: CZJ 80/1,8 with K mount?
I second that, the CZJ 80/1.8 is superb lens. It's similar design
(maybe even same?) to Pentax K 85/1.8 (I have to dig out my 80/1.8 CZJ
diagram), but in that case, the CZJ is original while Pentax is
"copy". Anyway, it's a gaussian design, aka Planar or Biometar, unlike
Pentax 85/1.9 or Jupiter 9, which are I think both Sonnar designs (the
Pentax a bit different).
Quality of CZJ Multicoating of course varied over years. Some
is quite bad (the very early just few years after Zeiss invented
multicoating), then some is quite good, as good as Tamron's BBAR I
think. No SMC though. Lens hood is essential with such big and fast
lens anyway.
As far as I know, there isn't such a thing that CZJ 2.8/135. CZJ
made a beautiful 3.5/135 (Sonnar) in this range. The 2.8/135 was
a Meyer design, and not bad at all for portraiture.
AFAIK the 2.8/135 (6-element) was branded CZJ as well, but it's still
the same old Meyer Gvrlitz design. It's VERY sharp stopped down, don't
know about wide open performance. But the Sonnar 3.5/135 ("S") is said
better. Better contrast, propably less flare too. Sonnar is prewar design, still best
for some lenses.
Frantisek
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Metz SCA: 372 or 3702 for SFXn?
Alan Chan wrote: I believe it uses SCA300 system. To verify, just see if it has a 5+5 contacts arrangement. If so, you need a SCA372 adaptor. This adaptor offers TTL capability with all Pentax bodies (as long as the body has this feature). SCA3701 (discontinued) and 3702 adaptors works on AF bodies only. Thanks Alan. That exactly answered my question. Now, are there different versions of a SCA 372 adaptors so I can look for the latest, or was there only one? BTW, nobody has experience with the 35 CT-2 regarding tele accessories GN at 35mm coverage? I wrote to Metz but am not too optimistic about quick answer :) Thank you all! Frantisek Good light! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
K2 REPAIR MANUAL, urgent PLS!
Hi! I am looking for a K2 or K2DMD (I have this body) repair manual. Now MLU is almost impossible to set on my body, needs some cleaning or what - it's rather hard. I have this body _just_ for the MLU, so it's almost useless otherwise for me (well-stopped down landscapes on velvia and bird photography with long but cheap=slower lenses _need_ MLU even on my relatively sturdy tripod). KX would be better but that I don't have. I am pretty familiar with easier repairs of K2DMD because the Pentax service refused to do it so I had to do it myself, but for this I dare not without the manual. 1) if anybody has K2 or K2DMD repair manual, either scanned or on paper, could you send me it by email or copy? I will pay you the copy money of course. 2) or could you try to ask Pentax for it? I asked Pentax Europe for it and they promised it but it crashed because the company which exclusively repairs pentaxes in Czechia refused to hand it over to me, and they also refused to repair the camera. Stupid bastards. Pentax Europe supposedly couldn't send it to me directly because of internal regulation but they were more than willing to send it to Czech repair company which in turn would (ideally) turn it over to me. Perhaps some other Pentax branch would send it? Thanks! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Metz SCA: 372 or 3702 for SFXn?
Hi, I found a nice metz 35 ct-2 for nice price, but I don't know which SCA to use... 1) can I use SCA 3000 (3702 Pentax) on 35 CT-2 (CT - analog flash?) analog flash with full TTL on digital flash body (SFXn)? And what about on analog flash body (e.g. LX,..) 2) something about the flash - 35 CT-2: is the GN really 35(m) at 35mm coverage? Or is it stated as in MZ-series flashes for 50mm coverage? I hate Pentax's and Metz MZ's inflation of GN - marketing sh*t. 3) can I put newer MZ-series accessories on this CT flash (FYI, it looks similar to e.g. MZ 32, with bounce head) - I am mainly interested in tele attachment for bird photography (because if this flash is real GN 35 at 35mm, it's MORE powerful than 40MZ !!!) Thank you for any information Frantisek Good light! P.S.: CC your mail to my personal address please, PDML through WWW is too slow. thanks! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: CZJ vs Pentax
you wrote: Hi Could you give me any comparison on the following lens? I may choose one of them. Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35/2.4 MC Pentax K 35/3.5 Thanks! Frankie Although I do not have direct experience with any one of them, I have seen both and my friends have used both. Also, take my writing with a bit of scepticism - it's more theoretical (but based on sound information). first, very quickly: If you need it for K mount camera, get the 3.5/35mm UNLESS you do low-light work, ie shoot wide open all the time. Then get the M42 2.4/35mm (used with adapter K). If for M42 camera, get the 2.4/35, but check if it's one of the later versions (better coatings). now not so quickly: 1) The Pentax K 3.5/35 is simple 5-element design, it's just a Tessar with negative element in front of it. It's the most primitive wide-angle retrofocus design, used quite early. Still, simple design+SMC means this is super-contrasty lens, because of so fewer elements compared to other wideangles. BTW, Yoshihiko's tests rate it very highly, which may be partly due to high contrast. I still believe this design to be somewhat primitive and unsuitable for fast apertures, because Tessar itself is not good fast, best Tessar types start at f/4.5 - f/6.8 apertures or f/9 (Apo-Tessar). But as this lens is 3.5 (relatively slow) aperture, I believe in Yoshihiko's tests :). Note, that from seeing this lens I think it has no clickstops between 3.5 and 5.6, making a 1.3 stop transition from wide open to first stopped down. Clearly no lens for low light, where you value even small increase in sharpness by stopping down a 2 lens to 2.5. In fact, most Pentax lenses are disappointing in this, as they have wide open and than nothing until full stop later. Such as the 1.4/50, which has 1.4 (awful performance) and nothing till 2 (very good performance). If it had 2.4 (good performance) between, it would be much better. 2) OTOH, the CZJ 2.4/35mm is among the latest traditional (non-ED and non-AL) designs, which has small and rather flat front element compared to earlier -and not as good- CZJ 2.8/35mm Flektogon. This lens is by my CZJ collecting friends rated among the best CZJ lenses, near such gems as 1.8/80. So I think this is a very good lens, even near wide open. As it is also full stop faster than the 3.5/35 and can be stopped down better But this lens is only available in M42 and Praktica B mounts, so it's rather hard to use it in K mount unless you shoot wide open all the time (because when used via the Adapter-K it becomes manual-aperture lens, when you have to manually open the aperture to have bright view to focus then stop down to selected shooting aperture, which is a pain unless you shoot at its maximum aperture or near it). So, for landscapes or normal day-light or flash shooting get the 3.5/35 if you are using K mount camera. The CZJ coatings, although adopting Multicoating quite nearly (seventies, just after the western Carl Zeiss invented it), have worse MC than contemporary SMC. And yes, it's visible in the images - more flare. Lens hood is needed. But CZJ's later coatings (more orange in colour, compared to more pinky older coatings) are quite good, not as SMC but still good. Still, even their early multicoating is way better than Kiron's multicoating. I hope this helps, and now I am looking to people who own both lenses to compare them practically. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
re: MZ-S Sync Speed and Studio Lights
Hi, I think it warns about some strobes which have longer duration of full flash than 1/180 sec. This is easy to find in studio strobes as most aren't any faster than 1/200 sec, sometimes less. Obviously, when the strobe flashes for a duration of 1/130 sec at full power than some of the light gets cut off as the shutter is open for only a 1/180 sec, resulting in underexposure (how much of it depends on the strobe, at the graph of its light discharge compared to time). Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Manfrotto 308RC ballhead - problem?
Hi all! 1st, thank you for all the input in the previous thread on various Manfr. heads. I finally bought one to complement the 055 NAT. I decided on a ballhead, the 308RC (although I seem to remember somebody complained about the resin ball being a problem? I can't find it in my archives). Although it is less satisfactory for my 500mm lens than a #329RC 3-way head I also considered (which is very nice indeed, a lighter but solid version of 229), I decided on the ball as it is much quicker to set up and put away, also lighter, as I don't plan on using the 500mm that much (I am still about to sell it, BTW, to raise money for a good Pentax-brand wideangle, see my FS post in arch. if interested. Pretty cheap g). But there is a problem with my 308 - if I am not very careful when tightening it, the head turns several degrees around the vertical axis (pan axis). It's not much when doing it carefuly, but still is an annoyance. Is it normal with this head? I don't recall such behaviour when I tried it out in the shop, but I didn't test so vigorously then. Is it normal and if yes, is there any simple remedy? I liked Gitzo ballheads very much, really great but even the lightest ballhead they have costs more than my tripod (nothwistanding I bought in in a sell-out). Thanks! Frantisek Good light! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re[2]: help - Bogen/Manfrotto heads?
Thanks Bob! You gave me valuable experience. From what I recall, the 352RC was smaller than 168, but you still say it's better? Can I loosen it and operate it loose, tracking the subject? Would it hold a smaller MF setup? Do you have any experience with 329 3-way head? They say it's more stable (lower more centered center of gravity) but is it true? And what about fine adjusting? The 029 exhibits same problem (although propably on smaller scale) as the head on my old Japan tripod - when I tighten it up, the composition changes. That's a big problem for me, especially with longer lenses. Thanks a lot! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re[2]: help - Bogen/Manfrotto heads?
Hi Alan! Thanks a lot, your experience is very valuable to me. Your comments on #168 head are same as Bob's, so I will avoid it. Propably if I can't get a nice Gitzo I will look at the 352RC. The wooden ones you talk about are I think from Belebach in Germany, I one considered buying a very cheap wooden monopod from them, but before the order came through to them, thay rised the price by 30%, so I cancelled and got a Manfrotto one (434B 3-section, a damn good one but very bulky for general carrying about). But I heard praise about their wooden x-pods, and wood is still best at cancelling vibrations. I was considering the 455 tripod as they lowered the price substantially (30%) as it's being succeeded by the 055 I think, but perhaps the Berlebach would be better (I fear much expensive too). Thanks! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
help - Bogen/Manfrotto heads?
Hi! I finally got some money to get a new tripod over my old 69 Made in Japan, which is now quite wobbly. I ask for some comments on the following heads, please. (I will buy either MA 055 CLB or MA 455 B, the older equiv. of 055) ballhead - cheap but heavy enough for me is #168 - any comments on it? Using with up to 500mm lenses or medium format camera (and future upgrade to some smaller LF, crown graphic or similar) ? or 3-way head, #029 or #329 ? or cheaper MA 141 RC ? What would be better? I have had a pan head, but would perhaps now like more a ballhead, especially as the #168 has additional pan control. But is it friction enough to do small adjustments with 500mm lens? (which I don't use that often, though). Thanks! Any thoughts on reliability and ruggedness of this setup greatly appretiated too! Please respond directly to [EMAIL PROTECTED], I get it much faster than from list via web. Thank you. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Sigma 2.8/28-70 quality? experience?
Hi all! I found this lens used for a nice price. It's the plastic, manual focus version, propably one of the older ones. PK-A mount. Any experience with its build quality and reliability? Is it rugged enough? I just sold a Tamron SP 35-105/2.8 as it was not much rugged and not wide enough for me. And what about optical quality? Especially wide open... anybody used it? What size prints are possible at wide open and stopped down, at quality needed for expositions (=big prints from relatively close). I do lots of BW which I print myself at big sizes. I will of course test the lens myself, but would like to know some opinions beforehand. Please respond directly to [EMAIL PROTECTED], I get it much faster than from list via web. Thank you. Thanks a lot! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
FS: Mirror 5.6/500 MC RUBINAR for Pentax K, $125
Hi all! I am clearing some not much used lenses to make room for a lens I wish for - the 2/24 FA*.And possibly something more too :) This time it's a mirror telephoto from Russia (or Ukraine, I am not sure where the factory is located). MC RUBINAR 5.6/500 MACRO is it called. It's built like a tank, all-metal construction, very durable (but of course it reflects in its weight). Originally in M42 mount, it was refurbished with K mount, and shifted 1 cm to allow mounting even on newer bodies which have protruding grips and pentaprism beyond the plane of bayonet (before, the lens would mount on K2 but not on SFXn, now it mounts on SFXn and still there is more space). It has a rotating tripod collar, big metal lens hood (reversable) and 2 neutral density filters (1.4x and 4x), plus all caps of course and leather case. It focuses down to very respectable 2.2m (7.2'), which gives it 1:4 macro ration! //The T/stop is in fact f/8 (see my explanation in archievs, real mirror speed or such. I can resend if you like. Lots of cheap 8/500 mirrors are in fact just 11/500. Watch the front element size - if it's much bellow 100 it can't be f/8. E.g. the Exakta 8/500 has ~76mm thread, so it certainly can't be 8/500 but 11/500 or less.// I was selling this lens some time back on this list, but then cancelled it as it went to the machinist to redo the mount to make it possible to mount on newer pentaxes and also a regrease of the helicoid, which is now smoother. The lens is very sharp for such a long telephoto, I can supply scans of parts of 26x39cm prints shot with this lens. It is in used condition, I can mail you pictures of it if you like. Glass is good to very good. NO FUNGUS anywhere! The black finish shows some scratches, but no dents. Enough laudatum on this lens. I am asking 125 USD for it, plus shipping (worldwide, choice of EMS - 3 days maximu / priority airmail - 1-2 weeks / UPS or similar). Other currencies (EMU - euros) accepted too. If you want escrow and it works in my country too, well, why not? Frantisek Vlcek, Prague, Czech republic. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Metz / Pentax 360FTZ flash exposure compensation
Hi all! The newest Pentax flash , the 360FTZ, is supposed to have exposure compensation ON THE FLASH, not via the body, if I remember the info here well. Anybody knows if this flash's feature would work on older bodies as well? And even bodies without builtin flash exposure compensation (= other than Z-1 series). Then, when a new SCA adapter from Metz comes for MZ-S (to allow high-speed synch with e.g. 54MZ5), it would have to have expos. comp. ON THE ADAPTER, same as e.g. Nikon SCA 3000 works. Then, could it possibly offer exposure compensation via the adapter even on older bodies? I don't know how the 3702 SCA works now, for Z-1p, whether the exp.comp. is set normally via body or via a switch on the SCA (as is on Nikon SCA). It would mean that even older bodies could have flash exposure comp. with new SCA and metz flash! Any insight/thoughts? Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Braun SCA flash, in Wienna
Hi! About a year or so back, I had a conversation with a gentleman possibly from PDML about a SCA system BRAUN flash of relatively high GN. The gentleman is from Wienna, sterreich. Unfortunately, I can't find the archived messages anywhere on my computer, it propably got lost in a crash. I still have a question or too about that flash. Please, if you are here, respond to me! Thanks a lot. Frantisek Vlcek [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Braun SCA flash, in Wien
Hi! About a year or so back, I had a conversation with a gentleman possibly from PDML about a SCA system BRAUN flash of relatively high GN. The gentleman is from Wienna, sterreich. Unfortunately, I can't find the archived messages anywhere on my computer, it propably got lost in a crash. I still have a question or too about that flash. Please, if you are here, respond to me! Thanks a lot. Frantisek Vlcek [EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S.: I am extremely sorry for mixing up the name of your city... unforgivable as I am living just few hundred km near it... it must be the late night hours I am writing this :) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: New Pentax 24-90 Lens
That's true. My SP 2.8/35-105 did the same. It was an exceptional lens when I got it, (but wide open), but after year of semi-pro use it got wobbly and resolution dropped down. It's clearly visible in the slides I shot when testing it after purchase and slides now. And I have got the manual focus version, I think the AF would be even worse. This experience got me back to K A primes... They just don't have such problems. Or maybe * zoom, if I can get enough money. Frantisek I just bought two of these, and although I have not yet tested them optically, I am a bit disappointed in the build quality. Very plastic. Zoom feel not that great. And both my lenses have some barrel wobble.which is inexcusable for a single barrel extension. I also have the new Tamron 24-135, and the build quality is much bettervery tight. Again, I have not yet compared them optically. Don't be fooled by the tight feeling. My SP35-105/2.8 was once very smooth nd nice (not optically), but everything was going wrong within one year... ( regards, Alan Chan - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Mz-S: Two Thumbs Up!
Just few thoughts: Well, yes. The cost of new FDD is 10$. But what about the externalities of that cost? These aren't included, and would add many times the cost of it. Cost of pollutiong the Earth by making it. Cost of living of some poor kids who get exploited by the company making it (or company digging up the aluminium to make it, or whatever). Cost of people shot by Shell or its puppet governments to get oil to make plastic. Etc... These externalities are NOT computed into that 10$ price of new computer drive. Same with cars, gas for the cars, ... If I throw out a product that cost 10$ but cost 100$ in REALITY, including all externalities, it's wasting a lot. I don't mean to sound like some anti-tech moron or luddite, but simply - we must control technology, not let marketing and technology control us. Or we don't survice. Simple as that. Feel free to argue at my mail address. Frantisek ** One thing to keep in mind here is back when things were made with such high quality, the cost of labor versus materials was different. Labor was quite cheap and materials were more expensive. The opposite is true now. I recall in the computer industry when a floppy disk drive cost $150 dollars and labor rates to repair and align heads was $25/hours. Now a new drive costs $10 and labor is $100/hr. That type of problem drives us towards a throw away mentality. The cost of disposal hasn't been noticed yet. I believe that corporations are looking mostly at cost and competition when they build and design products. There is a whole separate discussion on repeat sales and business growth as it related to durable good (cameras included). Too good and your customer base quits buying and you slowly die on the vine. Just some rambling thoughts. Bruce Dayton Sacramento, CA ** - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Mz-S: Two Thumbs Up!
Well, aren't modern goods manufactured by enslaving or at least worsening living conditions of huge amounts of people? Remember the Odoni people or the seabirds when you drive your car... We are not much better than those ancient societies. Everytime, OTHERS pay the real cost of our goods (most flagrant is of course the US price of gasoline). I am of course guily too - where do you think the silver for our films comes from? I dare not to think more... Frantisek *** [snipped] would take that position. Romans, Mayans, Incas, Egyptians, and most other ancient societies enslaved huge numbers of people who where literally worked to death to build those extravagant monuments. The economies of those societies were fueled by forceably stealing resources from neighboring peoples, enslaving them, and forcing the majority to attend to every whim of the minority. They operated at a level of brutality unheard of in the modern world. The monuments and incredible buildings you see today were built at a phenomenal cost of human life and suffering. Waste of resources? Absolutely. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fwd: Re: New Pentax LX with AF!!!!!!!!
Funny how just one several years long thread (on new Pentax flagship and later on MZ-S) just ended and now another experience begins. Get ready for three years of posts about LXII :-) Actually, LXII or similar is very interesting. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
re: 6x7 loupes
Hi! Horizon loupes (made by Russian or Ukrainian company, please our fellow Ukrainians nor Russian do not get angry at me! I am reall not sure which xOMZ makes this loupe) are pretty good for the low price, and they make an 6x6cm 4x one. I will have a look next time I see it if it covers 6x7cm. The loupes are realyl very cheap, several times cheaper than competition, but quality is certainly similar to competition - I tried a 10x loupe with haircross measure and found it excellent). So, I will reply more when I try the 6x6cm one out. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Acetic Acid (TNX!) Hypo clear
Hello! I would like to thank those members from the list who submitted valuable advice on handling glacial acetic acid (the concentrated stuff). It really helped! I got this 1l glass bottle of it sitting down on floor safely away, and finally got around to diluting it. I took the advice - to be VEY careful, and it was really sound advice! I was used dealing with 98% sulphuric or nitric acid back in school, but this stuff is much more vile. I took one very careful chemist's sniff at it (NOT from the bottle, of course, just waving my hand over it to bring the scent to my nostrils), pheeew! I put on my gas mask afterwards. Had I sniffed in non-chemist way, it would be a really bad experience... I wouldn't open this indoors! Anyway, I safely diluted it down to 20% for storage and 5% for stop-bath and developer-neutralising usage. Still about 2x stronger than ordinary vinegar (which is about 2% ?). I now have enough stopbath to last me lifetime :) QUESTIONS: 1) How much dilution should I use for stopping films? Should I lower the pH a bit? It's currently at around pH 3-4, and I don't want to cause emulsion swelling by transition from basic to too acidic enviroment (which would casue reticulation, just like cold emulsion into hot water does). Is this ok? Or should I raise pH a bit? I do think it's ok, though, just wanted to make sure at the experts :) 2) for neutralising developer splashed on clothing, hands etc. (to avoid getting hydroquinone rash or allergy), I think around 2-3% dilution is just right, whaddya think? 3) HYPO CLEARING - what is the chemical for this? Something with pH lower? And while it's best useful for baryta (fibre) papers, do you use it with films too?I find Kodak's own Hypo clear quite expensive at the moment. But I guess they have more in it than just kitchen soda, right? So what's a hypoclearing agent for films (all my hypo is rapid-fixer formulation based on Ammonium Thiosulfate) ? Thanks a lot, you chemically-advantaged friends! Frantisek P.S.: I assume it would be more proper to ask this at rec.photo.darkroom or such, but there I know nobody but here I know you :-) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Acetic Acid (TNX!) Hypo clear
ad: please CC (copy) your replies to my personal address as well, the archives from which I read PDML are two days late! It's [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: building a print processor (darkroom)
Hi! I am not sure if I hadn't asked this already, if so - sorry. I want to build a darkroom print processor, similar to NOVA ones - basically an aquarium divided into slots, each one with drain. The first slot is transparent and is for developer, second stopbath, third hypo, fourth wash (perhaps fifth for final wash, or when toning). this machine would greatly save space in my cramped darkroom and prolong the life of chemicals as well, and hypo won't splash all over the place as it does now g. The commercially made ones are VERY expensive, and I like DIY. So, anybody built one? I would like to know some tips! Or, if anybody has bought a commercial one (NOVA or similar), could you send me pictures of the details of it? There are some issues I don't know how to address in building it, like what about print sticking to the plastic slot wall? (I don't know where I could get the wavy plastic or glass in big enough sheets. I want to make it at least for 30x45cm prints, maybe even 50x60cm prints. How to hold the print easily to be able to rock it around? And many more issues which will come out surely when I start the construction. Like how to glue it to avoid the acids eating the glue or reacting with it :) etc... Any help is welcome! OTOH, if any list member is inspired by this to make his own, the better! More heads together, more knowledge, as we say. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: building a print processor (darkroom)
ad: please CC (copy) your replies to my personal address as well, the archives from which I read PDML are two days late! It's [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Buying FA 2/24 cheaply - Europe (or other lenses)
Oops! That's horrible about the DG meaning Sigma lenses are optimised for center. Can it really be? I mean 1.5x or such sensors are gonna be history in 2- 3 years, but lens design can last more than 10 years ?! Would they make enough profits this way? But I heard this from another person, too. That makes the Sigmas not wanted for me :( And they were so cheap... But always, I will test this myself in the shop with roll of film. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Buying FA 2/24 cheaply - Europe (or other lenses)
Hi! I asked in another thread about build quality of FA 35/2, FA *2/24 and Sigma EX (new) 1.8/24mm. Unfortunately, price is of concern - so I have to choose. I saw that FA * 2/24 is quite cheaper at e.g. B+H and similar mail-orders, but shipping from USA would add a lot to the price (esp. with UPS, regular airmail is cheaper).Is the FA * 2/24 available cheaply in Europe (or closer to Europe) as well? I think this one lens is very hard to get used, must be a keeper :) To give you an idea, in Czech republic this lens costs new 20 000Kc, that's roughly 500$ (including 22% VAT. But I have not large enough business to claim back the VAT, and am mostly in red numbers anyway :-).At B+H, the lens costed 399$ last time I looked, perhaps somewhere else it could be even cheaper. For comparsion, the new Sigma EX 1.8/20 is actually cheaper by almost 50$ than the *2/24 Pentax! And the EX 1.8/24 is about same priced as FA 35/2 Pentax. So it's a tough decision. I would like a good wideangle to complement my F 1.4/50 and 2. 8/20mm CZJ Flektogon (which is great, if stopped down, but being screwmount lens it's tough to use quickly), preferably fast for low-light. So if anybody knows a good source in or near Europe, for any of the mentioned lenses (e.g. the 35/2,...), please mail me!!! Thanks a lot! Frantisek Vlcek P.S.: PLEASE RESPOND DIRECTLY TO MY MAIL ADDRESS [EMAIL PROTECTED] , THE PDML ON WEB IS NOW VERY SLOW UPDATING, ABOUT 1-2 DAYS LATE. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Buying from US - best pay method? Safe?
Hello! I put a WTB ad on rec.photo.marketplace for Sunpak Pentax TTL module PT-2D and Ext-11 cable (BTW, if anybody has them and is willing to sell, I would much more like to deal with list member than somebody completely unknown!). I was desperately seeking these. Now a gentleman in US is selling one, but we have yet to agree on payment method. The price is not much (although I would prefer less if possible g The not nice dollar / Czech crown ratio makes the price higher), but still an amount of money I wouldn't like to loose - both the Ext11 and PT2D come to 1/10th of average income, to give you an idea. Especially with the recent thread on ebay rip-off. What's the best way to pay for such stuff, which is safe as well? I thought about having a deal paper faxed to me, but than I have only a fax, from who-knows-who,... I thought too of having faxed to me a certificate from the post office (we agreed on airmail, being cheapest) Any advice needed, and many thanks for it! (btw, I am from Europe, without any international credit card) Frantisek P.S.: PLEASE RESPOND TO ME DIRECTLY AT [EMAIL PROTECTED] ,THANK YOU! I read PDML from web, and the update time is now extremly slow, 1-2 days...) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
FS: Sunpak G4500DX (AT555) ttl flash (potato masher)
Similar in power and features (some more, some less) to Metz 45, this is the classic example of Potato-masher style flash. Until the very last moment, I wanted to keep it, even wanting to order some used accessories from USA. But then, although this flash is very powerful, I don't use it at full power anyway, so I want to get some smaller flash, propably a metz MZ 40. I am available light guy, I got this flash for banquet photography once, but the job didn't work out, so I don't need such powerful flash. As I am selling it, I should perhaps advertise it a bit :) This flash is IMHO actually BETTER than PENTAX AF400T !!! Much more options, .. . GN 45 @ 35mm coverage (so no artif. inflated high GN at 105mm zoom but quite lower at 35mm, flash coverage standard). TTL/AUTO/MANUAL settings. 7 AUTO apertures! From f/1.4 (100asa) to f/11 !!! AF400T starts at f/4 (phew!). f/1.4 is great for fill-in autoflash. manual down to 1/64 power setting! Precise control over aperture and power in manual mode. Bounce and Swiwel all around! 270 deg + 90 deg., let's you shoot right back into your face :) many power options... 6 AA cells (alkalines/NiCd/NiMh), many powerpacks (actually, all the TR II and 510V packs for Pentax are made by Sunpak), included is AC/DC source (input = 100/120/220/240 V - international!) for free. incl. original case, filter holder free! Hotshoe/X synch adapter for cameras without X synch socket. incl. quick-attach bracket, with twelve positions for the flash (e.g. for macro). incl. (!!!) (free!!!) is my genuine home-made bounce/softener, similar to Lumiquests'. It spreads the light for even 24mm (and possibly 20mm!) coverage, softening shadows a lot!!! Works great. Folding! TTL for Pentax cameras is possible via PT-2D module and EXT-11 cable, both are I think readily available in States (but very rare in Czech republic, that's another reason I am selling it). I was offered PT-2D for 15$ and ext-11 for 10$, myself. Can link to the seller if wanted. I have made two powerpacks for this flash, I will include one of them for free!!! It has 3500mAh capacity, NiMh batteries, enough power to keep you blasting for days. Ingenious heavy-duty outdoor connector (with lock!) and coiled cable connects it to flash via small hole in battery compartment door. You can still use AA batteries if you want to, just insert another battery holder (or unscrew the wires from the power pack's one and use it for AA cells). For easy and cheap charging, the battery pack is dual-connected: It ends in normal type high-amperes connector (which is readily available in e.g. Radioshack), and then a small adapter is fitted ending with the heavy duty outdoor connector (which has lock!), female socket with lock. Into this plugs and locks the connector at the end of the coiled cable - all very sturdy, much better than Quantum's connectors (Yes! One connector alone costs 10$ each! Quantum wouldn't make any profits using them - they being a company maximising profits much cheap out on everything possible). And this great, great, great flash can be yours! Delivered everywhere in the world, by airmail or whatever you choose! Mail me with offers! [EMAIL PROTECTED] Frantisek :) that was fun. So please mail me off-list if you want it. I can supply more information or something is at www.tocad.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: safe hi-volt flash - SFXn ???
Thanks, Carlos! But are you sure the Vivitar is high voltage? I think I remember reading about some Vivitars being high, some being low voltage, the change differentiated only by made in... or serial number... But perhaps I am wrong! I will try to ask Pentax, but I doubt that they will have this info on such older camera, when it's not in the manual. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Ebay Tamron SP 70-210/3.5 for almost nothing... whine :(
Hello! Last friday on ebay.de was ending an auction on this lens in exc condition. The price was a steal! I was prepared to bid on it, but just 2 hours before end, whole ebay went into maintenance... Ouch! I wanted to throw my computer out of window... Of course it ended before the maintenance mode ended, so a bidder got it for about half the price in US @ KEH. Just why doesn't Ebay auto postpone all auctions ending in maintenance time? It's the sellers who lose money there... Anyway, I comforted myself that propably it was somebody from the list - was anyone here so lucky? Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
safe hi-volt flash - SFXn ???
Hello! Is it safe to use older, hi-voltage (around 100-200V) flash on SFXn? The manual (which I finally got) doesn't say anything bout it. I do have a safe flash (big Sunpak G4500DX), which has just 5V, but it's so big I don't take it every time. I would like to bring my old small autoflash sometimes. Thanks ! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Pentax K/A/.. wideangles comments URL
Hi all! I am looking for an url - could you tell me where there were the comments on Pentax wideangle lenses? I remember seeing such page, but now... I think it was not on S Halpin's lens comment site - these comments were clearly from one person, and on most of Pentax wides... And I ad the impression that the writer was from Japan I thought at first it was on Yoshi's site. Thanks! Perhaps it's simply gone, or the comments made their way into the Lens comments site. But if you do remember what I mean, please tell me :) Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
M42 K PROBLEMS SOLUTION !!!
Hi! I just recently found out a thing that means a lot for me, as owner and lover of several Carl Zeiss Jena screwmount lenses and user (lover g) of Pentax K mount camera(s). I bought quite early the Adapter K, but found out that when used with my M42 CZJ lenses, they would wobble (back and forth) and even could be rotated in the K mount (affecting exposure!). I thought this was just bad engineering of the original adapter K, and stopped using M42 lenses via the adapter (or had them permanently adapted to bayonet, like the 500mm mirror). But lately, I found out that this sloppines was caused by different design of rear flange of these CZJ lenses, different from Takumars!!! (I don't have any M42 Taks so I didn't compare the CZJ and Pentax M42 lenses). Basically, the Taks are all flat around the screw, while the CZJ lenses have about a small ring area around the screw which is higher (0.2mm) than the rest of the rear flange. Incidentally, the M42 K adapter needs the lens to be completely FLAT back to work properly!!! Easy solution for those using the often excellent CZJ lenses (like a 20/2.8, 80/1.8, 35/2.4, and others) : cut out a ring 0.2mm thick (good material is e.g. fibre BW paper, singleweight). cut the ring such so when it's on the lens rear flange, it covers the large recessed area and brings it level with the small more central 0.2mm higher area (which is actually where the 45.46mm register distance is measured from). Glue it in place with thin glue, or fix with tape, whatever works... You now have a lens adapted for use with Adaper K, and it will work as nicely as any original M42 Pentax xxx-Takumar !!! For some, this may be no news. But it certainly was for me :) Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Yoshihiko Takinami's URL (resol.test page)
I do get 404 errors there - what's the correct url? Please respond directly to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: ot ol: Know-how neede
Excuse me, but what exactly *IS* a slinky? Or just another one of the Friday ones...? Frantisek, ignoramus et ignorabimus. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
PDF Manuals: SFXn, K2
Hi! Anybody got or seen these manuals (either user or service)? I talked to Pentax Czech distributor but they don't have (neither have Pentax Europe) the K2 or K2DMD manuals, and they won't send me the service manuals (although they no longer repair the camera! Do they fear I might start producing a K2 copy or what?!). Good news: I might get the SFXn manual soon, and I will put it on web, hopefully (after 4 months of waiting for it!!!) Bad news: the manual is in somewhat called ChiWriter. I _might_ be able to convert it to TeX, but installing Linux again on my 1 gig drive to just convert this manual will gonna be pain in the a** :) So if anybody here has ChiWriter TeX (or even better, ChiW RTF/ WORD/ etc), please let me know (if you are willing to do it)! Please, if anybody got any manual (service/user) for K2 or K2DMD, which you could scan or something, let me know!!! Thanks Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
MZ-S in Europe (Czechia) (was: MZ-S is comming to Poland)
For the PDML members from Europe's central and eastern parts: I just got this note from local Pentax distributor rep, that they will be selling MZ-S in second half June (so, Polish friends, come here if it's not there that soon G), and interestingly enough, there is also a set of MZ-S FA AL 28-70/4 !!! The lens can still be bought new here. They have propably not yet heard about FA 24-90 lens, though. The price is about 1000 USD for the body alone, so it's quite expensive (that's including 22% VAT though). The 850$ prices quoted from some US mail-order companies is really tempting, if you are not able to deduct the VAT! Sadly, I will not be the one to buy the first MZ-S here. My student and part- time freelance finances simply do not permit :( And if for anything, I am putting money aside for an 2/24mm :) No more crappy af lenses which become wiggly after some more serious use! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: June Gallery Comments
Collin Brendemuehl wrote on PUG this months [ Collin, that's a great job commenting on every one of them! There were lots of images] [...] Arch/Whale by Frantisek Vlcek, Czech Republic Definitely eye-catching. Did it take you long to find the right angle to shoot? It looks like a tough one to compose. Thanks. And yes, it did take me longer to compose, and still I am not satisfied with the composition - I left too little free space on the left side. I should have made more composition bracketing, now I know :( Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
re: It's Time To Go
Good bye Shel! We will miss you! I hope this doesn't mean you are selling all your Pentax gear g? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: 5 films in one tank DEVELOPING
Hello! I need some advice from the experienced darkroomers out there, please! I finally found a cheap secondhand tank JOBO 1000 with up to 5 reels of 135 or 3 reels of 120 film at once, 1200ml capacity. It looks great compared to the tank I used before (2x135/1x120, leaking,...). 1) I use lots of Microphen 1+1 on HP5+. My questoin is, can I safely develop 5 films at once using the 1200ml of 1+1 developer (that would be 120ml of stock developer, should be well enough per film), without any increase in time? Because Ilford states that if one reuses a stock developer (e.g. 1l of stock, used for 10 films. For second film - +10% time, third film +20% ... tenth film +90% time), one has to increase dev time per each other film. But what if I develop all the films at once (or half of them)? Do I have to increase time somewhat? Either developing with stock or diluted microphen. Thanks a lot. 2) The JOBO 1000 was accompanied by a slightly more expensive JOBO 2000, which was almost 2 times as big (capacity, not height) with 1900ml capacity (5x135/3x120). It had bigger diameter. Is this tank (J. 2000) also usable with sheet film, using some special holders? I can't otherwise see why to make it with such big capacity (except that I would be able to use dilutions beyond 1+1 Microphen, which I do not use much, and which I can use even in the J 1000 if I make a run of fewer films) Thanks for any advice Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
SMC K 4/45-125mm ?
Out of curiosity, who knows something about this Pentax lens? I think I do remember seeing it somewhere in even M42? Anybody has it? The number of elements is strange for such an old lens. Is it good? I was tempted by it long time ago (partly because of the mechanical quality of pure-K lens), but got an 2.8/35-105 Tamron instead. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re:Fast Zeiss 85s in M42?
hi Paul, the 1.5/75 CZJ is Sonnar design, made originally for Exakta. Quite a good lens, esp. stopped down. Unfortunately single-coated AFIK. It should come close or beat the SMC Tak (at least the older, 1.9 Tessar/Sonnar design, sure), I think g. The other one, 1.8/80 CZJ Pancolar, is a gaussian design, propably very similar or same as Planar design. I do have this lens, and while the Multicoating on my sample is not as good as modern SMC (needs a lens hood still g), in normal light it is about as sharp as my SMC F 1.4/50 or just slightly less (at relatively same apertures - 1.4=1.8; 5.6=5.6). It's good wide open, and excellent even moderately stopped down. It should be as sharp or even better g than all the portrait 80mm' Pentax made (xcept the new ones, A FA 1.4/85 of course). AFAIK it's same or very similar design to Pentax SMC-K 1.8/85 (most those 1.8/80 lenses are of same, planar-derived design). Only drawback my sample is prone to flare from strong light sources :( Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: 2 Gianfranco (I am sorry, I know...)
1st, sorry that I am sending this to list. But I had persistent problems getting tru Gianfranco's mailserver anti-spam filter g, so this is my last option. Again, I am very sorry. * *** ** * Message for Gianfranco follows: Hi Gianfranco! I had an error regarding your anti-spam filter (or whatever it is). I am trying again. Hopefully it will get tru. Thanks for the suggestion. I tried it out on a "test" roll of TMY I bought for just this occassion and exposed at similar place (ie a contrasty lighting, ala concert). I tried both Xtol 1+1 and Microphen (stock). The times written on Xtol package and kodak's web are grossly inadequate IMO. The ID-11 times for Xtol are propably good start, from my own experience too. I just can't understand why Kodak did such a mistake here - as I see it in my negs (earlier, TMY at 1600), their own times for pushing TMY in XTOL 2 stops give me just 1 stop push, with both shadows and highlights lacking. HP5+ at 1600 is much better IMO, except maybe the grain. Instead of Kodak's times for pushing TMY, I used the "general" times for pushing in compensating developers from Massive dev chart site. That's 2.5x for push-3, 1.8x for push-2 and 1.4x for push-1 instead of feeble 1x for push-1, 1.333x for push-2 and 1.666x for push-3 they say for Tmax films. So I developed the test roll in Microphen (my favourite), for 2.5x the base time, that's about 18 minutes. It came out, there is something, but the shadows are virtually non-existent (but still much better than with Xtol). I think it will have to do, though, as the lack of shadows is IMO the error of the film, not developer. MPH is speed increasing enough, and I can get MUCH better 3200 pushed film from HP5+ than TMY in MPH. My only hope is that I did another error when shooting the original TMY (as TMZ). That I overexposed it, so there would be some shadow detail, and I could use softer grade to bring highlights back. It's my only hope. Now I know: never keep TMY TMZ in the same bag !!! BTW, how do you like the SS 100 at 100 iso? I have not tried much TMX, as I prefer traditional films (It's a pity they discontinued Agfa APX 25, twas great in Rodinal. At least EFKE still produces their 25 iso pan film) BTW2, where did you get the Ilford chart with times for TMY pushed? I couldn't find anything. All my Ilford documents have push times only for their own films, and all other films they have data only for base iso exposure. Thanks! Frantisek At 00:27 5.3.2001 MET, you wrote: Hi Frantisek, I've made a similar mistake not long ago: I've exposed a Fuji Neopan SS 100 at 800... Someone on the list (William Robb, I think) suggested to use the Acufine. I have instead developed the roll in Microphen (13' at 21C, agitation 10" every 60") and the results were really fine (first time for me with Microphen, I usually use D-76 and T-Max). I've developed at the same time (in the same tank, for 11' only) a roll of HP5+ exposed at 1600. It came out very well, so I think that developing the TMY at 3200 in Microphen should cause no problem. You only have to calculate the right developing time. Try: http://www.digitaltruth.com/photo/chart/tables/tmx400.html It seems reliable, although it displays the wrong times for the Xtol :( I usually apply for the Xtol the same times of the D-76, with nice results. I have an Ilford dev chart that shows 15' at 20C for TMY at 3200 in ID11; while it shows the times for the TMY in Microphen only up to 1600, but they are almost the same (7' at 400 both the developers; 8 ID11 /9:30 Microphen at 800; 12' at 1600 both), so I guess that 15' at 20C in Microphen stock solution should be the way to go. Hope this helps. Gianfranco PS: let me know about the results! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: New Tamron zoom
Nick wrote: I am looking for a zoom to replace my old 35-80 and I am casting my eyes over the new Tamron 24-135 SP. Has anyone seen any reviews of this lens? I am going to use it on my PZ1p. I suspect it will be quite a bit cheaper than the Pentax 24-90 and has a more range but I have no idea how the quality will stand up. Nick, in my experience and from what I heard, such super-zooms are generally not much good. I have Tamron SP 2.8/35-105, and I like it, even for big prints (well stopped down,of course!), although it has lots of colour fringing in the corners. The newer, "better" version was SP 2.8/28-105, which by all reviews sucks - even more fringing, etc... Newer is not always better. I would guess the 24-135 SP be even worse. And for the price of it, you can propably buy two 2.8 zooms from Tokina (for example, 28-105/2.8 costs ~40 000 Kc /1000$/ here. A Tokina or Sigma 2.8/28-70 zoom costs from 15 000-20 000 Kc! And both are considered way better than the 28-105/2.8). But if you are simply looking for an universal lens to produce 4x6" prints and not much more, any quality zoom will be be ok. But maybe the new Tamron is really good, some 24-x zooms are considered to be very good (e.g. the Nikon's 24-120/3.5-5.6), although I still think a zoom that's 5.6 WIDE OPEN at long end simply sucks because my zoom is already STOPPED DOWN 2 STOPS at 5.6 - while my zoom's quality at 2.8 maybe sucked, at 5.6 it outperforms the Nikon anytime (and at f/4 it outperforms it by a full stop :) Sorry I couldn't help you much with the _actual_ quality of that new Tamron, but I just wanted to tell you that a 2.8/28-70 from Sigma or Tokina or an used 2.8/35-105 Tamron might be a lot better, and propably at least 1.5x cheaper. (the SP 2.8/28-105 Tamron started to retail around 800$ in the US I think). There are still some relatively cheap 24mm primes (e.g. the Sigma 1.8/24, told to be cheaper by 100$ than the Pentax one), or ~20-35 zooms to complement a 28-70 lens. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: New Tamron zoom
*** My reply to Ralf: Unfortunately, Tamron's SP series is not so good now as it used to be. I wouldn't rate it "FA* so to say". Normal Tamron zooms are cheapish consumer zooms, while the SP series has the pro lenses, but similar to other third-party's pro lenses. I think the * Pentax lenses are all somewhat over that level :) To be honest, Tamron made great lenses in the SP series, but they chose to discontinue most of them, for strange reasons... All IMHO, of course. And the SP 24-135 is propably be a big flare-prone lens. At least the Pentax 24-x has Ghostless coating (or not?). My 35-105/2.8 SP certainly flares, although not worse than other 2.8 zooms. Frantisek *** Ralf wrote: Here in Germany, the Tamron SP 24-135mm is sold well above $500, whereas the announced Yen price for the Pentax 24-90mm puts it in the range of the old FA 28-105mm, means below $500. So the Tamron is more expensive. The magazine reviews here are very positive. Note that the SP series is Tamrons high end series (FA* so to say). Unfortunately the focus direction is wrong way in Pentax and Nikon mount. Ralf - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: New Tamron zoom
Unfortunately the focus direction is wrong way in Pentax and Nikon mount. Ralf I would say the Tamron's got the "right" way focus direction. All my old lenses (the lenses which made SLR concept - Exakta lenses. Granddads of all SLR lenses g) turn the way as Tamron (and opposite the way of F 1.4/50). So I am used to the Tamron's :o) Frantisek (P.S.: I am glad that the "5 posts a day per member" limit is not yet :) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax SV (brochure) - nice camera :)
I was wondering how can I select the X if it's between the 1/30 1/60 - is there an intermediate click-stop there, or I have to resort to 1/30? Frantisek and thanks for all the info! ***Glenn wrote: *** On the S1a and H3, all the _marked[*]_ speeds are in the .../15/30/60/125/... pattern, but the 'X' speed is in between 1/30 and 1/60. Could that be the source of the confusion? ([*]Uh, that is, the sync speed _is_ marked, but it's marked with an X instead of a number.) -- Glenn - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pinholes (was Re: glenn's peephole fisheye)
afaik the thickness of the sheet in which the hole is matters. You will get more vignetting at wider view with thick sheet than with very thin sheet. Also, the elipticall hole (as seen from the side) will cause less sharpness, perhaps. The reality might differ, though :) Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
help, please. WTB Sunpak module
Please, I am desperately seeking a Sunpak TTL module for Pentax. It's "PT-2D". I need also a Sunpak dedicated cord "Ext-11". Without these, I can't use my super-duper big flash on my Pentax body. In Czech republic, Sunpak doesn't sell any flashes, so there are virtually no (even used) accessories. Please, if you have either PT-2D and/or Ext-11 for sale, or if you do know where I could buy them (preferably used, new they cost a small fortune. New they cost 1.5x MORE thant what I bought the G4500DX/AT555 for!), send me email. Thanks a lot! It's really getting difficult to use the TTL RTF with my zoom lens (2.8) - more than half of the picture is shaded by the lens, even without hood on. And in Auto mode, I cannon select anything less than 5.6 with 1600 asa film (I need fill-in flash) _good light_ -frantisek- PS Please CC your message to my private mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], I can read the web PDML only infrequently. Thank you! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
MZ-S brochure D/L?
Please, who offered it, send it to my email. I mean the 186k file. Thanks a lot, I seem to lost the original thread. Or is it on the web already? Thasnk Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
choosing bulk film
First, I am sorry for bringing this again when somebody asked similar not long time ago. I have it in my archives but I would like to know something diff. I ran out of bulk, and am thinking about trying something else now. 400 film, or p3200. Nothing 400 iso. I have few questions, please: 1) what are the differences between these classical BWs: (grain, pushability,... all in one developer) Tri-X (kodak) HP5+ (ilford) APX 400 (agfa) Pan 400 (ilford, rebadged HP5+? Not so pushable?...) else...? I was able to get RMS value on some of them, but all were RMS tested but in different developers, so the values can't be compared :( I already have used HP5+ a lot, but Ilford is the most expensive where I live, and they have considerably rised prices, again ;-/ 2) If the price is right, I could get some new technology films. Delta 400 Tmax 400 Tmax p3200 (yes! it's made in bulk. But I think pretty rare in bulk. But if it was cheaper enough than canister version, even mail-order, I would like it. I gather that Delta 400 is better for landscapes than reportage. Nice for these not-tripod-with-me hikes (I *do* have a fine grain film to use with tripod for landscapes... it's similar to Technical pan = no grain at all!) 3) I think that the Tmax400 and Delta 400 are not to be pushed much. The Delta is more sensitive of exposure/development/... than Tmax or not? 4) I often pushed HP5+ to 800 and 1600, and would like to do the same with the other films. Opinions? (I could get one 400 for not pushing, like the Delta, and one for reportage, but would prefer not to) 5) Anybody knows where to buy film cheaply around Czech republic (that's all Central/Western Europe) by mailorder? Most places I checked didn't have enough bulk film choices. Thanks for any links, even telephone numbers!!! Ilford is really expensive here, and so is Kodak (although only some films), so I would be glad for any links where to buy these even not in bulk in Europe mailorder. Thanks a lot! The #5 is propably most important, as is #1. These are the questions bugging me most. Frantisek Good light!!! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Pentax PR sucks? ...
Anybody here understands why the new "FA 3.5-4.5/24-90 (IF) AL" has not thw "ED" added? Multiple sources here said that it has TWO Extra low dispersion elements. Any stupid third party lens maker like Tamron (whose consumer lenses now suck. "SP"'s not what it used to be) puts every mention of technical gizmo on its lens and ads. Why Pentax did not ad ED there? N* says ED even in some zooms. I can think of two reasons: 1) Pentax's PR is dumb, as they showed at times in the past a lot. 2) They are gonna market it at such an user group which knows ALL about the lens, including the use of two ED elements. But that's only about 300-400 people (members on PDML) ;-) Is my reasoning bad? I would not like the nomber 1 to be true... Frantisek Good light!!! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Kodak RMS - grain of films
Somebody complained we can no longer compare Kodak's films to other fims, because Kodak dropped RMS tests for its films. Well, while it's a pity, I would certainly like to compare e.g. Portra 160 to Agfa XPS Portrait 160 (RMS=3.5), Kodak still lists BW films' granularity (or listed it, when I d/l the pdf). Here's the data, for anybody interested. Souped in D-76 @ 20deg Celsius, at nominal EI TMX (TMAX 100) RMS 8 TMY (TMAX 400) RMS 10 TMZ (TMAX p3200) RMS 18 Here is the resolution info: (first value is 1:1000 contrast, second is 1:1.6 contrast) TMX 200 63 TMY 125 50 TMZ 125 40 Hope this helps. Frantisek I still don't find this so much helpful for comparsion, because other manufacturers use different developers to state RMS data on their BW films. For example, Agfa states RMS=14 for APX400, but developed in Refinal, which is a grainy developer (although speed incr.), compared to D76 or others (IMO Refinal is somewhat similar to Microphen, at least in uses). Similarily, Foma Bohemia uses Microphen (sic!) for RMS values of its films. Thus we get something like RMS=13.4 for Fomapan 100, but I can attest that this is a very finegrain traditional 100 iso film, which if developed in something like Xtol gives somewhat FINER (and a lot nicer) grain than TMAX 400 in TMAX-RS (Yes, I have tested this). So it should be more like Fomapan's RMS=10 in normal developers. I think some companis are just DUMB when marketing their products (but at leasty they don't LIE), vis Pentax's ED ASPH elements in lenses... Why is not the new 24-90 marked (IF) AL ED ?! It uses 2 ELD elements as told on this list... Franitsek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
SMC - Zeiss x Asahi ?!?
After reading the recent thread on "who invented SMC" (again ;(, I decided to throw oil into the fire here: 1) Even on AOHC pages, it's said that MC was developed by OCLI, US company doing work for NASA. Asahi licensed (parts?) of the process to form SMC. //that's what's AOHC article says. now information to the contrary, from my friend a (collector): (rephrased by myself) Around 1967, Zeiss foundation decided to "scrap" Zeiss Ikon (which was not producing enough profit), and entered negotiations with Asahi. Goal: producing of camera bodies and lenses in Japan but to Zeiss design QC. This connection continued for 3-4 years but then Asahi determined that Japanese hojme market wouldn't buy Japanese made Zeiss lenses. From this cooperation, came pooling of research into multicoating techs, which resulted in both companies claiming multicoating at the same time. The remnants of this cooperation may be even the K mount, which some claim been at least codeveloped by Zeiss for use on the joint Asahi-Zeiss camera (after all, Asahi pirated the popular M42 mount invented by Zeiss Ikon/Zeiss Ikon VEB /east/). The information comes from joint Asahi-Zeiss press releases between 1966 and 1972, and various sources on Zeiss history (e.g. The Zeiss Compendium by Barringer Small). Also, Asahi was supposed to give NASA a stipulation when NASA acquired MC optics from them, as NASA had previously been obtaining such gear from Zeiss. Zeiss wrote NASA a confirmation that Asahi had the rights to use the process. Please understand that I do not have access to "Western" photo-history literature. Most of the historical literature about photography I have is either dealing mainly with pre-WWII photography or dealing only about US photography. So this is all information I heard from my friend. Also, to the issue of T coating somebody mentioned: Lens coating was being researched long before WWII, but all the attempts were not much working. In fact, about turn of the century somebody saw that old lenses with sort of haze/"coat" on the elements produce better pictures than brand new lenses. The haze was just monomolecular so it acted as a anti-reflective layer. Many approaches were tried, but only one proved to be stable and hard enough was one by Zeiss, developed before WWII - vacuum coating of hard substances on the glass. They called such lenses "V" for Vergted I think, and some "T" for Treated. Other companies followed. Actually, I don't give a damn if the SMC on my lenses was developed by Zeiss, Pentax or both together, and who did first Multicoating layers. I think that somewhat stable MC must have been researched quite a long time before SMC was marketed, by several companies. After all, Fuji claimed to be using EBC on some TV lenses even back in 1960s (as said by AOHC article). And scientists must have been trying some of it even before. It is maybe more like who developed the first commercialy usable, durable multicoating. From my information, it was joint Asahi Zeiss. I said I don't give a damn, but it of course interests me (but not enough to start some flame war - I just presented information known to me). Camera history is an interest to me (specially history of lenses... a question for you: was there any cooperation between designers of Planar and Biometar /these lenses are virtually same, except Planar has splitted first element into two, and Biometar has splitted second element into two/ ? :) Frantisek (please, please, CC a copy of your message to my personal address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] too, because I have moved to the NOMAIL list - too much mails with the MZ-S here :) P.S I am so sad! I was just told that MZ-S will not be introduced before Summer into Czech republic :( - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: external power for AF500FTZ
I still think that building it yourself is the cheapest and best solutions (if you are at least lightly skilled with light soldering iron for tin soldering). Get a number of NiCd batteries (or NiMh, but NiCads are slightly better for flashes), strong charger (I use one made for RC models charging - it can output about 3 Ah !!! That's super-fast charging, with inteligent shut-off to protect batteries. Slightly slower chargers are much less expensive). My flash uses 6 AA batteries, I made my packs 7 cells (so the voltage of NiCd/Mh matches the voltage of 6 regular alkalines, rechargables have lower voltage). I used old cells from recycled notebooks (I got them for a smile), but 3.5Ah or 5Ah cells are not that expensive now. I have 3.5Ah battery pack, which lasts significantly longer than similar offers from Quantum, can be recharged VERY quickly if needed (1.5 -2 hours at most), and cost me not much, the price was roughly same as a Quantum pack (used) would, but the quantum one would have about 1/2 to 1/3 capacity ! For comparsion, 3.5Ah NiCads have about 3-5x more flashes in them than 6 AA alkalines, and the flash recycling is many times faster. You can check with a local RC modelling group or find one on net or find their discussion group on net to get help I think. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: WTB: K-series normal lens
I'm also looking for the cap that screws on top of the wind lever if anyone has access to any source for old parts. Mark Mark, K2 really benefits from being cleaned. Especially the exposure-compensation and MLU lever got much more easiter to operate after I clened the whole camera (K2DMD). It's also an enjoyable process! Seeing all the great designing under the hull of K2 cameras... I lost that *damned* cap too... ;( At local Pentax repair, they sold me for 1$ a chrome one, from god knows what body. I painted it black, and it looks like original. Try to contact any Pentax service, they could have that part even original or similar. Frantisek (looking for the plastic piece in winding lever of Olympus 35 SPn :) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Report from PMA
At 16:01 12.2.2001 +0100, you wrote: Flavio wrote: I can understand the disappointment at the limited finder coverage but it isn't worse than the current cameras' and it surely limit costs. I don't agree here, first of all a large finder coverage is a specialised tool in my opinion, and useless for an all-round camera. All "normal" printing services I used, even professional grade, crop the image slightly. Although I use slide film, I don't mount the slides much (it's hard to get an audience and I hate to set it up just for myself). I have them usualy scanned or printed using Frontier lab, where full-format IS possible (more like 98%). And ALL pro-labs here offer (and do it most of the time!) FULL-FORMAT option on the prints - with parts of the negative margins visible. Hell, even some CONSUMER minilabs offer this (although it gets rarely asken for). So I do see a reason for 100% (or 98%) finders. And even 92% finder is much more than you get from standard 8x10" prints - that's 4:5 while neg is 2:3 ratio!!! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Group Project: Monty Python (Re: OT OT OT OT OTRe:GoupProject)
What? ... I don't kno**#$% RGH!!! Splash. (seems we got a friday week ;) Frantisek At 06:42 12.2.2001 -0500, you wrote: European, or African? Treena Harp wrote: I thought they were swallows. - Original Message - From: "Mike Johnston" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2001 9:54 PM Subject: Re: Group Project: Monty Python (Re: OT OT OT OT OTRe:GoupProject) Jeepgirl wrote: who's money python? Monty, not money. He was a professor, I believe. Studied pigeons. African pigeons. Southerly migrations of african pigeons. With coconuts in their beaks. Boring stuff, really. But, as I recall, dangerous if you didn't know the correct answer. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: News from PMA - MZ-S and other stuff
At 23:36 11.2.2001 -0500, you wrote: At 01:38 PM 2/12/01 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: As it is virtually a software function how they execute MLU on the Leica R8 system is: set the mode to MLU, one press of the shutter pre-fires the mirror the next press triggers the shutter after which the mirror comes down ready for focussing/composing and the next pre-fire trigger, this cycle continues until MLU mode is disabled, sweet. Maybe a feature of the MZ-Sn :-) That does sound like the best of both worlds! - MCC Yes, combined in the ugliest slr ever - R8 (why Leica made such ugly and big slr when their rf cameras are so cute and small is out of my imagination... R8 also looks like it's been made by a designer on a bad trip, imho. I much prefer the early German hardware (like Contax S, Contaxes, Leicas #,M3,...) to those strange ugly R8 slrs. BTW, who will bet that Contax S is the nicest SLR ever ;) ? Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Group Project: Monty Python (Re: OT OT OT OT OT Re:GoupProject)
"How can you win? I've chopped off your arm, AND your legs. You're just a bloody stump!" "Doesn't matter. I WIN!!!" "No, you don't. I won!" "No. I WIN! I WIN!" Swwsss. JoMac, Imagineer with Camera Come back bloody cowards! I will bite your legs off! (arm legless Green Knight trying to pursue King Arthur) Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: What is the 'best' M42 pre-spotmatic camera?
At 20:19 11.2.2001 -, you wrote: It's interesing how the North [but not as north as Canadians, so maybe Central, but not as low as Texans] Americans get everything the wrong way around :-) ! Thanks for the info on Practicas - however - sitting here in Manchester England it's interesting to see you assume I'm North American. Peter :) Ooops! Many many pardons! I thought you have taken back the independence from USA because they could not choose their president (old joke:). Serisously, I was not refering to you in the first sentence! It's only that on EBAY most of people call their M42 goodies "Pentax screw mount" ... So you are in Manchester? Lots of people from PUGW are from UK, too, perhaps some even near you. It seemed that lots of Prakticas (the later versions) were imported into UK. Frantisek P.S I should have guessed your location from the domain @btinternet.com, does it mean (gasp!) British Telecom? Do they still suck ;) ? (we have our own fixed lines telecomm monopoly here still until next 2 years. ;-/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT OT OT OT OT Re: Goup Project
Would you mind if we end this by the Monty Python song ? *** Never be rude to an Arab An Israeli, or Saudi, or Jew Never be rude to an Irishman No mater what you do. Never poke fun at a Nigger A Spik, or a Wop, or a Kraut, And never put down... (Explosion!) *** I hope nobody takes THIS as offensive... Well, if you do, go and find something about Monty Python first... Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT: Photographic Musings While Stuck in Traffic
At 19:31 9.2.2001 -0600, you wrote: That brings back memories. Years and years ago when I first started in photography I had to take a picture of a store front for an advertising client. To get the sun right, it had to be shot in the afternoon in the middle of rush hour. I set up a view camera with an exposure of 1/100sec. As I recall, 10 multiple exposures at 1/1000sec was right on and there was no traffic. You're on the right track. I remember reading that Swarzild's rule (?) (=reciprocity failure) applies to multiple short exposures as well. 1000 x 1/1000s is NOT same as 1s... (Actually, one photographer DID that thousand exposures!!! Must have been very tiring... he photographed Wenceszlaw's square in Prague, lots of traffic and people). He found out that he needed MORE exposures that just thousand of 1/1000s. BTW, if you ever come to Prague or any near, try to look at one book: Jan Reich, PRAHA These are contact prints from his 5x7" camera, of Prague streets COMPLETELY devoid of both CARS and PEOPLE. As few may know, Prague has a very nice jewish quarter and a lot of very old streets (although now it's quite spoiled by tourism... the crowds everywhere and the ads there too ;-/ ) And he DID NOT use time exposure (or 1000x1/1000s) to get rid of people on all his pictures. He sometimes simply selected such days and times when there very very few people... you can tell on some of the pictures from shadows - they are sharp, having not moved between the exposures as they would with long exposure. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: What is the 'best' M42 pre-spotmatic camera?
At 18:37 10.2.2001 -, you wrote: When I first got into photography in the early 70s I used "Practica" cameras from East Germany. My first one was an "L2" - 42mm screw mount, no meter, and completely mechanical 1 to 1/1000 sec shutter and very nice Carl Zeiss Jena F1.8 50mm and 135mm f3.5. I know it's not Pentax "except the mount" but I believe there is some connection. If you could find one I bet they change hands for very small amounts nowadays. I did at the time however lust after the more expensive TTL technology then being offered by Pentax and others. Regards Peter It's interesing how the North [but not as north as Canadians, so maybe Central, but not as low as Texans] Americans get everything the wrong way around :-) ! M42 (aka "Pentax screwmount") was NOT invented by Pentax. M42 was invented by Zeiss Ikon, first used by Zeiss Ikon Dresden (the East German part of Zeiss) in their first SLR with built-in pentaprism in the world, the Contax S in 1949. At the same time (or slightly later in 1949), KW produced Praktica camera with M42 mount too. These two companies merged in 1959 into VEB Pentacon (= PENTAprism CONtax). Pentacon continued to make Praktica cameras until 1990 (in the 80s, they changed into a bayonet mount) Your Praktica L2 was a budget version without TTL metering, made from 1975. First Praktica to use TTL metering was Praktica MAT, introduced in 1965, just a little later than Spotmatic. Prakticas are nice, simple, rugged (somewhat. Shutter is rugged, steel. Rest of camera is less, although I have had dropped cracked Prakticas stop metering but still their shutter was all speeds spot on). They are the K-1000 of European camera world - simple cameras great for begginers, cheap. Most photographers started on them, here. They are capable cameras, if a bit ugly (only the L series, though). And had excellent Carl Zeiss Jena lenses usable on them. But I would rather get a nice spotmatic for my M42 lenses, now (well, or a Praktica IV B. One of nicest cameras, and a mechanical wonder inside, appealing to people like me), because Spotmatics are just better ergonomicaly and quieter and better viewfinders and last longer, except maybe the cloth shutter. BTW, what's the usual Spotmatic's synch speed? Praktica had 1/125 ;) What Spotmatic should I look for with that X speed? AFAIK even the early K bodies had 1/60 max synch. Even KX :) Frantisek (as you can see, Praktica fan in a way :) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Average cost of B+W film development and contact sheet
At 08:29 8.2.2001 -0700, you wrote: decide which negs to have printed at the pro lab. Yesterday I sent a 120 B/W neg to the lab to have printed on the Fuji Frontier system (10x10 @ $8.50) that does so nicely on my color transparencies. The counter person advised that I may not like the results because it would be printed on color paper, but since it was just a test I would go ahead and try it. I am also having another, similar B/W neg, custom printed (10x10 @ $14.00 USD). I will be interested in how the two compare. Jerry in Houston Jerry, please let us know how the BW looks from the Frontier system! If they work right (you should better have them printed Sepia or other tone outright from start, I guess that colour paper isn't much good at neutral BW tones), it would be a pleasant alternative for times when doing it home is not possible but prints are needed. I guess the results will depend a lot on skill of the operator - I had some great results and big failures on same machine from diff. people operating it. Let us know! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: R: PENTAX (tm) was not Asahi's at first!?
At 23:53 8.2.2001 +0100, you wrote: As I wote some time ago, the Pentax name was KW/Pentacon (tm) in South Africa only, where they marketed cine projectors under that brand name. KW already used the name Pentax for a prototype medium format camera which never saw light as a mass-produced product. It looks like they missed registering the Pentax name (since for some time the eastern block didn't agree on western rules about patents and copyright) and Asahi could take it (but South-Africa). It is evident that some time later Asahi agreed with Pentacon about the Pentax name in South Africa too. Bye, Dario Bonazza Sorry Dario, I forgot about your post. Thanks for clarification! It's interesting to know it, I will forward it to the other group :) There the history-minded would like it. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Internal focussing
At 11:41 7.2.2001 +0100, you wrote: Then it's time to believe... Believe that a FREE lens will offer you a far - -superior quality between 1:2 and 1:1 magnification ratios than a "standard" lens. I guess here we are mostly talking about corner sharpness and focus-plane flatness. I WANT TO BELIEVE! But, the 50mm has no FREE system and it works good. So, with the 100macro when I'm near 1:1, I work at around 60-70mm. For better image quality you sacrifice focal length, is this correct? Or better, you sacrifice it to get an all-in-one lens (good infinity focus + good macro focus). It seems the 100mm macro is actually a 60-100mm zoom lens. :-) I was thinking about obtaining the 100mm macro, but now I am hesitating. I actually don't buy a 100mm macro but a 60-70mm macro. Is this worth the money? Hmm..., hmmm Enablers, speak up please! Best wishes Wieland I still think from my and others' experience that a well-made Tessar will do the job quite well in macro. Especially the slower-aperture versions (the original version of Tessar had 6.3 aperture AFAIK. Over time, small changes were made as to made it as fast as 2.8, with some lost of optical quality maybe - the slower versions are IMHO better). So don't throw out those old macro lenses because of new FREE designs! At _least_ they don't change focal length, like the 100mm macro does (60mm at 1:1 ... PHEW!!!) When ever do you need super-sharp corners and flattest field at 2.8 ? And at f/8, I would think a good Tessar would do the job as well, perhaps not AS sharp but still very sharp. Also, as a sidenote, there were Apo-Tessars made for Largeformat, which could IMHO blow the macro FREE lens :) (AFAIK, they were corrected for macro work. I might be wrong though, I don't have one of those beasts - but long for one + LF camera with it :) ) Frantisek ( feeling a bit like Pentax-bashing today :) But Tessars are really that good! I just reexamined some 6x6cm Velvia shots at f/8 or f/11 from old, uncoated, Tessar equiped Rolleiflex, under a 15x loupe - they were good! Most enlarger lenses were tessars too, and lots still are!) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT: monitor configuration
At 15:12 4.2.2001 -0500, you wrote: "Frits J. Wthrich" wrote: Adobe Gamma is not included in the LE version. That is one of the features left out making it a limited edition. Yikes. Well, there ends my ability to assist. Sorry... I know of a couple of colour calibration tools for Windows, but all are in the real real expensive price range, which I'm assuming you don't want to get into. :) -Aaron What about ICC profiles, in Corel Draw package? "old" Corel Draw 8.0 can be had for about 60$ here (legally!!!), and AFAIK it includes Corel Photopaint, as good as photoshop is, utilizing ICC profiles for Monitor, Scanner and printer calibration (and Photopaint works with them, it shows off-gamut colours if you want, etc!!!) Some of the graphics pros even like Photopain better for some of its features than Photoshop (actually, they use both :) Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Discontinued FA 4/28-70 AL ?!? (RE: A 35-70 f3.5-4.5 - comments?)
At 22:14 7.2.2001 -0600, you wrote: I heard a Pentax rep state about a month ago that the PZ-1p production was stopped and Pentax did not plan to fill back orders on the camera, in favor of the new MZ-S. John A pity :( I hoped I could get one cheaper if the price falls, but now doubt it with this news. Fr. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: EI2000 (was:RE: Discontinued FA 4/28-70 AL ?!? (RE: A 35-70 f3.5-4.5 - comments?)
Oops. Mea culpa. I am sorry! I must have read it somewhere - the local phot zines are just full of crap! Ok, that's good news! I had the wrong impression. True optical viewfinder is of course much better, even with beamsplitter! I actually filmed few times with Super-8 cameras with same thing, and propably it's quite brighter than them. Fr This is not exactly true. The camera has a true TTL optical viewfinder that sees through the lens similar to that of a 35mm SLR. However, the viewfinder of the EI2000 does not work with a flip-up mirror but with a beam splitter. This beam splitter sends the light [...] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Dof Preview??
At 08:14 8.2.2001 -0800, you wrote: Personally, I still have trouble getting any useful idea of depth of field by using the depth of field preview but I do find it invaluable for judging the quality of the out-of-focus background in macro shots. I tend to think of it as a "quality of bokeh preview" button. Also, it's quite good to judge flare (which pretty much disappears with most lenses, but sometimes gets worse) stopped down - I found DOF preview INVALUABLE for flare preview in my wideangle landscapes (hey, even my SMC lens flares :) Frantisek (btw, a cheap, not most secure but still better than nothing DOF-P can be had on ANY pentax body by half-way turning the lens out. Try it, but don't lose the grip on the lens :) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
PENTAX (tm) was not Asahi's at first!?
I just got this piece of info from one of my history-wise friends at Praktica group: *** Frantisek, regarding trademarks, do you know that the name "Pentax" was originally owned by KW? A range of KW cine equipment was made under the Pentax name but I suspect Asahi made an arrangement with KW to use it for its cameras. *** few explanations: KW was a camera maker in Germany, later merged (afaik) into VEB PENTACON. They certainly had (tm) Pentaflex for some of the later cameras. I do now know personally if the bit about Pentax is true too, but the person who told it is usually spot-on. KW also had hands in the first Prakticas. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Non-Pentax Non-Metz flash
At 00:40 5.2.2001 -0600, you wrote: I have seen Pentax and Metz flashes discussed and compared here as well as in the archives and FAQs, but other brands have barely been mentioned. Metz seems to be the favorite. What are your experiences (if any - maybe they're lousy products) with Sigma, Sunpak and Vivitar? Maris I have a Sunpak flash, the AT555 (or G4500DX in my part of world). It's a big (potatomasher) but very good flash, with almost same range of accessories as Metz. I got it for about 1/3 (!) of 45 CT-x used, and it's comparable with the Metz. Only problem is that I can't get most of the accessories where I live (they stopped importing it), so I don't have yet the TTL pentax module. But even on Auto, it's a wonderful flash, with ability to set almost any f/stop in auto (it has 7 auto modes! the fastest aperture settable in A mode is 1.4 with 100 film! Most Metz flashes have only 2 or 2.8 or more - the 45CL series has even less I think. Good for those fill-in with fast film and wide aperture). I built a battery pack for it, so I can shoot happily hundreds of full manual shots from one battery. Only thing I think comparable series Metz flashes have better is the bracket - Metz's bracket has one more slot into which the flash can be inserted parallel with the bracket, for easy nice vertical shots. Also, sunpak does few flash types not seen anywhere else, e.g. Macro flash (ringlight) with up to 77mm filter dia lenses, with 4 modeling lights! (only other flash with modeling light I can think of is the new announced Pentax flash). Also nice is TTL, hotshoe, barebulb flash (with attachable studio-type reflectors), with enough GN and TTL ability for a very small and very portable studio. Only problem with the AT555/G4500DX is that the TTL adapter for Pentax is analog only (so it doesn't AFAIK support second curtain flash or contrast control. Propably) Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Enlanger choice
At 04:56 5.2.2001 -0800, Richard wrote: [...] the lens itself. I have no problems with a Leitz Focomat but I am limited to 12.5x with a Fuji 50mm. This problem exists with Meopta Magnafax but not on the 5x4 LPL, The LPL bellows fold inside themselves better or there is a better design. Richard, which Magnifax do you have? I use an old Magnifax II (quite old) for 6x9 (it's up to 9x9cm), and I have the same problem with bellows not compressing enough. I solved it with recessed lens board, to an extent. But still I would like to upgrade to a newer model, the IV with VC head. I like the split-image focusing of them a lot! Even on my 40 yrs old Magnifax II, it is still working perfectly and giving me sharp prints (it's much better focusing method that trying to see "grain" in 120 Agfa APX 25 in 6x6cm neg ;) There just isn't any grain to focus by). Meopta enlarger lens are also worth looking at. I have a 4 element 105mm lens that at 7x magnification is slighlty better than a 5 element Leitz 50mm/4.5, a 6 element Fuji 50/2.8 or a 6 element Durst 80/5.6, that's not what I expected. Meopta do publish MTF curves for there lens on there web site, cannot remember the address. http://www.meopta.cz(it's in english) they publish MTF, relative ilumination, even chromatic aberation graphs numbers on their pages! If every manufacturer did this, it would be much easier to choose things. (it's interesting that most Western manuf. of lenses etc don't do this, while mostly all "ex-communist block" countries' manufacturers publish some resolution or such numbers on their lenses, even if the numbers are quite low!!! (they just publish a set of numbers and don't say these numbers are for wide open! At 4 or 5.6 the resolution of one such lens is comparable to newest Nikon lens of same focal length! Had this tested). Yhey don't know yet much smart ass marketing (or should I say: they don't know yet that _lying_ sell a product now...) they also have there a history section (like a virtual museum), quite worth looking into! I am shopping for the Magnitaurus (an 13x18cm/5x7" enlarger, 70kg weight), it's the only such big enlarger which can be had for nearly a smile used (compared to other 5x7" enlargers, of course). My dream enlarger would be the Meopta Agrand ;) Look at it and you will understand. The 4.5/105mm Belar is a simple Tessar formula, and Tessars (when clean and assembled well) are second only to macro or symmetrical process lenses in high magnification uses, IMO. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: A lens that only fits on plastic lens mount
At 14:01 6.2.2001 +0300, you wrote: My guess is that under similar use, the metal lens mounts will last substantially longer than plastic ones. --- Sorry, what do you mean with longer? 300 years longer than 250? Den Of course, modern materials can be great. But as you said, the real good modern materials are VERY expensive. When I was buying a bike, I had a choice of a normal, Cro-Moly (which is of course also a slightly modern material) construction, or a composite construction. The later was several times as expensive. And remember - the producers are cutting costs anywhere even slightly possible - the way of modern economy. They won't choose the best plastic, they will choose the least but still usable plastic. For 5-6 years at most, the lens will work (if not used much). But what then? We are still using our 50 years or even more old lenses, metal. Who has got a modern cellular phone that lasts more than 1 year of heavy use? People I know who have to use them daily (and phones of the big brands, Nokia and such), and have to replace it every year not only of snobbery, but also of heavy wear. I agree that a great lens can be made of plastic, propably as durable as old metal lenses or even more. But nobody's doing it because modern society just doesn't want thing to last long. That's consumer culture. American way imposed on us all ;) Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
re:A lens that only fits on plastic lens mount
At 11:54 6.2.2001 +, you wrote: Seth says: My guess is that under similar use, the metal lens mounts will last substantially longer than plastic ones. I reply: Agreed. Looks better, too, in most "classic" applications. But when do you know if it is worn out? Another scenario: You drop your camera and lens. Both mounts are metal and both are damaged because they are of approximately equal strength, which is exceeded by the accident. But if one was designed to fail under such extreme conditions, and that part was extremely cheap to replace, is that a "better" part? Should the "fail" part be on the lens? mike Another plus for metal: With enough shock, plastic will shatter. You can't much repair that. My friend accidentaly dropped an old Exakta lens (about 1 kg heavy) onto hard stone floor, from his standing height. It landed on the mount. One of the bayonet blades got twisted a bit - couldn't be mounted in the Exakta. A mechanist was able to either twist it back or file it away, and now it mounts into his Exakta as when new. If made with plastic mount, it would be repairable ONLY AS LONG AS THE PARTS ARE AVAILABLE. Anybody got parts for 50 years old lenses ;-) Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax-M 50mm f2
At 20:48 5.2.2001 -0600, you wrote: Has anyone taken one of these lenes apart? I have one that has lost the "click" on the apeture ring. What makes this happen and is it something that is fixable? I've taken most of it a part, but can't "see" what would be causing this. Thanks! Gary, you gained the only Pentax lens with any intermediate f/stop selectable, even half-stop from wide open (which, sadly ALL other lenses miss) ;) Seriously, you lost a tiny ball bearing. Try to search with a magnet for it (I think it's made of steel or such). It's really tiny I think. Fr. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: What is a Portrait Lens? (was Lens Sharpness)
At 19:33 4.2.2001 EST, you wrote: In a message dated 2/4/01 5:12:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have even tight framed head shots of people made with 42 mm lens - one that often get's "too wide for portraits" rating, which we like. Boy, what a 50 or wider lens can do to facial features, especially noses and ears! Of course it does! But this is what _sometimes_ is nice. And with some people / faces, I still think it adds an intimacy into the portrait. Of course, if I was doing a formal / business portrait (portrait studio like you have), the customers wouldn't propably like it - after all, most customers are pretty conservative ;-( The point I was trying to make (how bad to having to explain one's point afterwards :) was simply that while I prefer the ~80mm Flength for portraits, I have seen and even shot pictures that IMO qualify as portraits even if shot with other focal lengths. A portrait dosn't even have to have the person's face in it! Anybody seen the Annie Leibowitz's portrait of Pele the fooballer? On the picture were only the Pele's feet! Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: MZ-S's HyP/HyM/IF button
Oops ;) I just can't wait ;) Is it really end of this week? I hope some of us get the option to go there and post some info/photos! Fr. At 17:38 4.2.2001 -0500, you wrote: Hey folks. Can't we stop the speculating and wait till the end of the week when it will (hopefully) be formally shown at PMA? Bill - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: OT:Virii (was Re:)
At 22:39 6.2.2001 -0600, you wrote: I also received these messages on my PC todayhowever, as they had no subject lines, the sender was unknown to me and they had attachments, they went straight to my trash file. I'm glad I never bothered opening them. Just a quick note, the best way to avoid these types of viruses is to never open unknown emails, especially if they have an attachment. My understanding is, unless the virii writers have gotten really clever, if you do not open an attachment, it will not infect your system. John It's my undersyanding too, but with Microshit's mailers, one never knows. That's why I use Eudora ;) Plain old mailer. doesn't do anything that I do not know about (with all the security holes in M$ products...) Fr. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
oddities: sound recording film
Hi all the PDMLers who are wanting to push the limits (6800mm TC'ed comes to my mind ;) Remember when I wrote about ISO 3 film - ORWO DK 5, and was sad because Foma Bohemia discontinued another similar film Dokument Pan, leaving me with nothing else but few rolls of DK5 in freeze and desire to experiment more? Tech Pan is just too expensive for that sort of fun. Well, I just got about 50m (150') of BW Sound recording film (from a friend in movie industry), of God knows what make. It's still good, working! Interesting emulsion with my tests' estimated speed around 1-10 ISO at normal gamma, depending on developer (it produced thin shadows and blocked highlights when exposed as 25 ISO and developed in paper developer, resulting in very contrasty negs - about 3-4 stops range only !!!). The grain is impressive - there is no grain at all (at this speed, it would be a miracle to be grainy!). I am looking into making this film less contrasty - propably with pure Metol as developer, or the Coffee "developer" (said to be very compensating. but would need propably about full day in the stuff to develop :) I hope this is interesting for somebody :o) It presents another option for those wanting to try odd emulsions (ask for sound recording film) and super-low-iso, super-low-grain films (usable as super-high-contrast low-grain moderate-low-iso film as well, if developed that way). But beware of Kodak's one: I heard it has got huge "Kodak" printed across the middle of the emulsion. After all, in sound recording AFAIK only a side of the film is used. Some sound rec films aren't even coated evenly - only a half has emulsion on it. BTW, in the Ilford's MG paper dev, the neg was developed to almost NONE fog! Had I a densitometer, I could measure it, but from simply looking, the base/fog density is SOOO small! With highlight density pretty high (this is a very high silver content film, imo) Frantisek (happy :o) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: KMnewbie questions
At 19:57 6.2.2001 -0600, you wrote: Pentax sells User Manuals for $4.00 each - grossly overpriced.:-) shipping and handling. This service is available for United States residents only." AFAIK, ALL Pentax regional companies distributors / repair services offer this as well. They don't stock so many older manuals, but they have the recent ones (even of SF series). I just ordered two manuals for K2DMD n SFXn from "Pentax Czech" (or better - Pentax's distributor in Czech republic). Fr. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
sorry... for late posts
Sorry! I had problems with my ISP, so some of my replies are coming long after I wrote them - possibly even into already dead threads. Sorry. Frantisek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: State of the art consumer film scanners?
Have a look at scanner reviews (realworld, not magazine crap) at http://www.halftone.co.uk HTH Fr. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Available dark - TIPS IDEAS
Thanks for the tips. I will reply to some below:
[MAFUD:]
"Lightless", the 1900 fires any number of remote servo flash units. If what
you need is a trigger to fire other flash units, the 1900 will work,
understanding the 1900 does *not* emit "light" from its on-camera position.
+++ Mafud, thanks, although I think the 1900 will be way too weak to shed
enough IR light on the scene, I imagine it has power more like led diodes
in IR TV remotes or flash AF assist beams. I would be glad to be mistaken
;) I will look into it.
[GLENN:]
d) You'll want BW IR, because if you use colour IR all you'll
see is red (which is how IR shows up -- IR shows a red,
+++ thanks for tip. E6 IR is WAY TOO expensive for such experiments, anyway
(here a single roll costs as much as 10 4x5" Velvia trannies in Quickload
b) You'll be using the flash at a fixed guide number, rather
than either auto or TTL modes -- you may have to determine
+++ I thought so, yet perhaps the mentioned Kodak's datasheet will help.
This is a project needing lots of experiments anyway (twill be my first IR!)
I need to get me some of that. (Any E6, or specific emulsions?)
+++ I always thought that any E6 will do. Propably best source for
inexpensive ones is ask at a local pro lab doing 4x5" and MF stuff, some
photogs throw the occassional "darn darkslide left in place!" frames in the
lab. I was able to get several rolls of 120 Ektachrome 64T for virtually a
smile ('twas after the "best before" date), and didn't do many shots on it
- so I will just left the rest of it blank. Somewhere on web is this
article (parts follow):
quoted from "HandMade Photographic Images by George L Smyth"
I just determined what I had long suspected. I measured
the spectral transmission characteristics of one and two
thicknesses of
unexposed but developed E6 films and found them to be comparable to
that
of a Wratten 87 IR filter. In addition I also made some pix on HIE
film
through two sheets of D max EF sheet film and compared the pix to
some
taken through a "standard" IR filter, the Wratten 87.
The result of this is that it appears that one thickness
of E6 film is roughly the equivalent of an 87 filter but with a
broader
spectral response and with some 1% transmission valleys at 500 and
600
nm. Its transmission starts to drop from 1% at 700 nm to about 95%
at
800 nm. Two thicknesses of D max E6 are basically visually opaque
with
transmission dropping rapidly starting at 720 nm and dropping quite
rapidly
to 90% or so at 850 nm.
Maybe they might be closer to what a 88 is. Basically
the 2 sheets of E6 simply do not have as steep of a cutoff as the
Wratten
filters do nor as good a maximum transmittance. But they are
serviceable!!!
especially for placing over a flashgun where expensive Wratten
filters
tend to fry and buckle!
Picture-taking wise, the two thicknesses of E6 film did
not seem to degrade image sharpness significantly when used with
4x5 format.
I have not tested 35mm. They would obviously not matter much when
used
over a flash for inconspicuous flash photography at parties, etc.!
(camera
lens with or without additional filter over it).
/end of quote
+++ I suspect that just any type of E6 will work, although he mentions only
Ektachrome. When you look tru a e.g. Fuji E6 black frames, you see only
purple/dark red colours.
[Bill Casselberry] (BTW, I am sorry but I forgot what your "bill" handle
was, to differentiate you from other bills on the list ;) It was sometimes
last year when we had this "discussion". Now W.Robb's Wheatfield Willie,
etc. What about you :o)
I haven't used these, but you want the flash head that outputs
IR light. From discussions on the IRList, the E6 film isn't all
that great for this will be badly distorted after a few shots
from the heat - if you try it, have plenty on hand.
+++ Would you remember what were the other problems with E6 filter besides
cracking from heat?
+++ For my Sunpak, I can make an indeffinite amount of the E6 filters from
old Ektachrome for nearly a smile. But I would liked to use IR on a big
two-strobe Braun flash from 1950 (its power is similar to the Sunpak's, or
about 45-55 GN(m), but with almost 100 degree coverage at this GN!!!). It's
a powerful flash with separate power unit and BIG flashtubes generating A
LOT of heat - ideal for IR flash. Also, it charges off house AC, so it
doesn't do that buzzing sound. But it uses studio-flash-like reflector,
around 8" in diameter, so I would need bigger filters. 8x10" E6 is pretty
expensive. Better stick with one flash, though ;)
Will the TTL metering work well?
your IR source will be constant, so manual exposure after a
determination would be sufficient.
But the flash's auto sensor or body's TTL flash sensor wouldn't propably
