No the fast 35-70/2.8 was only for the ME-F.
A smaller manual focus 35-70 f2.8 would be welcome, but never appeared.
I always hoped for such, but...
See Cotty and his Franken-lenses.
Perhaps you and a Dremel Motor tool can make some adjustments,
like taking off the box for the 4AA batteries
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 13:12 +0100, Chris Mitchell
chris.mitch...@which.net wrote:
John Celio's AF 35-70/2.8 arrived and is united with the ME-F that's been
sitting in a cupboard for years:
http://mitch.myzen.co.uk/PDML/_IGP5615.jpg
With new batteries throughout, it all works perfectly. AF
John Celio's AF 35-70/2.8 arrived and is united with the ME-F that's been
sitting in a cupboard for years:
http://mitch.myzen.co.uk/PDML/_IGP5615.jpg
With new batteries throughout, it all works perfectly. AF is slow and only
works in good contrasty light. It's done by pressing a button
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 16:45, Joaquim Carvalho wrote:
I'll report on it's fast glass slow focus performance when I put it on
the ME-F tonight.
I finally had the time to test the ME-F with its fast 35-70mm F/2.8 AF
lens. I shot a roll of film and was very pleased:
AF is not fast
Joaquim Carvalho wrote:
I'm happy, I've been the whole morning playing with my
new ME-F
I bought an MEF cheaply a little while ago, with the mirror
stuck/shutter not cocking. Sent it to the Aus Pentax distributor who
refused to fix it, saying parts weren't available. What they meant
A funny story: The auction (from Australia) said fungus on this lens.
In an act of faith I tried to believe the guy really meant no fungus on
this lens. I bought the lens, there's no fungus on it!!! :)
This guy seriously misrepresented the article, what feedback does he
deserve?
Great
,
almost, ... just a bit more ... o.k., done it ... focus achieved.
I think the reason for the commercial failure simply is that it did not work
well enough.
Sven
Zitat von Joaquim Carvalho [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Brian Walters wrote:
I suspect that the commercial failure of the ME-F with its
From: Joaquim Carvalho [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/07/07 Thu AM 01:51:14 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: ME-F
Don Sanderson wrote:
Get all the foam off, just don't worry about the old
adhesive, it won't hurt anything and it requires using
solvent near the screen
feel
when I turn the focus ring manually. It's also a real piece of
photographic history. For 33 USD I'm really glad I bought it.
I'll report on it's fast glass slow focus performance when I put it on
the ME-F tonight.
A funny story: The auction (from Australia) said fungus on this lens.
In an act
On 7/7/05, Joaquim Carvalho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A funny story: The auction (from Australia) said fungus on this lens.
In an act of faith I tried to believe the guy really meant no fungus on
this lens. I bought the lens, there's no fungus on it!!! :)
This guy seriously misrepresented the
really feel
when I turn the focus ring manually. It's also a real piece of
photographic history. For 33 USD I'm really glad I bought it.
I'll report on it's fast glass slow focus performance when I put it on
the ME-F tonight.
A funny story: The auction (from Australia) said fungus on this lens
it.
I'll report on it's fast glass slow focus performance when I put it
on
the ME-F tonight.
A funny story: The auction (from Australia) said fungus on this
lens.
In an act of faith I tried to believe the guy really meant no
fungus on
this lens. I bought the lens, there's no fungus
I'm happy, I've been the whole morning playing with my
new ME-F
It was the first SLR autofocus camera, even if only one
lens was made for it, I never understood how some people
can say it wasn't.
It is a great camera: when using common lenses it is
exactly the same as an ME Super
From: Joaquim Carvalho [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/07/06 Wed PM 02:47:29 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: ME-F
I'm happy, I've been the whole morning playing with my
new ME-F
It was the first SLR autofocus camera, even if only one
lens was made for it, I never understood
Carvalho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 9:47 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: ME-F
I'm happy, I've been the whole morning playing with my
new ME-F
It was the first SLR autofocus camera, even if only one
lens was made for it, I never understood how some
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 14:09, Don Sanderson wrote:
Don't be too picky about the old foam, just get it smooth
enough to hold a new piece.
I'm afraid that by sharing lenses a tiny bit of that foam will end up on
the CCD of my DS.
@pdml.net
Subject: RE: ME-F
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 14:09, Don Sanderson wrote:
Don't be too picky about the old foam, just get it smooth
enough to hold a new piece.
I'm afraid that by sharing lenses a tiny bit of that foam will end up on
the CCD of my DS.
Don Sanderson wrote:
Get all the foam off, just don't worry about the old
adhesive, it won't hurt anything and it requires using
solvent near the screen. That's scary! ;-(
Made it! It took over three hours and 20 wooden toothpicks, now I'll go
to sleep but I'm afraid I'll dream of sticky
Brian Walters wrote:
I suspect that the commercial failure of the ME-F with its autofocus
lens is what set Pentax back in the autofocus race. After the ME-F
they went back to manual focus systems in the P series and were not
ready to meet the challenge of the Minolta 7000.
Can't understand
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: ME-F
Don Sanderson wrote:
Get all the foam off, just don't worry about the old
adhesive, it won't hurt anything and it requires using
solvent near the screen. That's scary! ;-(
Made it! It took over three hours and 20 wooden toothpicks, now I'll
- Original Message -
From: Derby Chang
Subject: wounded ME-F
I need some medical advice from this august group.
I have a ebay ME-F that seems to be stuck in the mirror-up position
and the shutter won't fire. The wind lever isn't cocking the
shutter (it is free to move all the way
I have a ebay ME-F that seems to be stuck in the mirror-up position
and the shutter won't fire. The wind lever isn't cocking the
shutter (it is free to move all the way to the right), and the
rewind button is locked in. New batteries are installed. I've tried
it in the x125 position
Hi Derby,
The rubber parts inside have turned to tar like stuf
and the lubricants have turned hard and sticky.
It needs a CLA badly.
Unfortunately the ME-F is a good bit harder to work
on than the ME Super because of the extra stuff added
on for AF.
Try this fellow and see what he can do:
Eric
WRobb wrote:
Treat it like a recalcitrant child, and paddle it's backside.
Thanks William, and John.
I tried some harsh treatment on the child. It hurt me more than it did
the ME-F. ME-F is still holding its breath. Alas. I was going to get a
CLA on it anyway.
D
I need some medical advice from this august group.
I have a ebay ME-F that seems to be stuck in the mirror-up position and
the shutter won't fire. The wind lever isn't cocking the shutter (it is
free to move all the way to the right), and the rewind button is locked
in. New batteries
4. It weighs slightly more.
It's a bit taller, too.
Fred, K1FW
How many years have you had THAT one, Fred?
Since the 1970's, I think. (I had K1PUA before that.)
Fred, K1FW
another club member who still
holds his ca 1940s cal, W4OXH.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: ME-F vs ME Super
Bill Owens wrote:
Bet you $1.00 it's a vanity call. We have a club
-
From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: ME-F vs ME Super
Bill Owens wrote:
Bet you $1.00 it's a vanity call. We have a club member, George Poteat,
K4GP.
Bill
Ahhh, that could be. I haven't
!
- Original Message -
From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: ME-F vs ME Super
graywolf wrote:
Interesting, because they did not used to issue calls with O or I in
them
because they were easily confused
Hi Don,
Dr E D F Williams wrote:
Mine, in Cape Town in the 1950s, was 'ZS1HK' -- that's a 'one' not an 'ell'
Don
That was just a couple of years before I started in ham radio.
Interesting thing is, with ham calls, everybody knows there is no all
alpha character calls.
Gee, I hope that's
for a fee of something around $15.00 for
the 10 year term of the license. We also have another club member who still
holds his ca 1940s cal, W4OXH.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: ME-F vs
Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You _know_ why, Bob, you're just feeling obstreperous and contumacious
today...
keith whaley
Bob Blakely wrote:
Why is it that when I open mail with the subject Re: ME-F vs ME Super,
I
get something totally unrelated to to ME-Fs or ME Supers?
1.You are lazy
7. to piss off Bob Blakely.
Yes, Bob, I and others are real rats, not nice polite people like you.
--
Bob Blakely wrote:
Why is it that when I open mail with the subject Re: ME-F vs ME Super, I
get something totally unrelated to to ME-Fs or ME Supers?
1.You are lazy asses and can't
Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's caused by living on an island - island fever. They can only drive
around in circles. Makes them dizzy.
I thought they were cranky just because they're so old. Having been born
in the Cretaceous period, you know.
From: Bucky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why
Hi,
Saturday, November 15, 2003, 7:28:07 PM, I wrote:
3.You are cretans and don't know how to change the subject line?
People from Crete have this problem? Jeez, no wonder the Minoans are all
dead...
of course, I remembered immediately after I sent this that all Cretans
are liars, so of
No, I am [the] consistent liar.
What'd you guys do while I was asleep?
Regards,
Bob...
Do not suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying
the object which is abused. Men can go wrong with wine
and women. Shall we then prohibit and abolish
Simple question this time: is the ME-F an ME Super with add-ons? Do
the add-ons hinder when not using the dedicated AF lens, or can one
forget about them and just bear a bit more weight?
Thanks,
Kostas
It is exactly that: A ME Super with an added battery compartment (condition of
which you should check). With MF lenses it has the benefit of focus
confirmation.
Sven
Zitat von Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Simple question this time: is the ME-F an ME Super with add-ons? Do
The problem is that the ME-F eats batteries like peanuts.
Ciao,
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 1:51 PM
Subject: ME-F vs ME Super
Simple question this time: is the ME-F an ME Super with add
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Dario Bonazza 2 wrote:
The problem is that the ME-F eats batteries like peanuts.
Even without using the AF? Any ideas why?
Thanks,
Kostas
to shoot, with the risk of not having them handy when necessary.
At that time I suspected a faulty camera, but then I was reported the same
problem by other ME-F owners. I don't have an answer for that, I can just
see two possibilities:
1 - It's a common fault of the ME-F. Many ME-F can break
We can make a poll here. Anybody has been using the ME-F for some
time? How much a battery set usually lasted?
I've never noticed much of any extra battery drain from my ME-F's
(compared to ME-S's) (although I only occasionally turn on the focus
confirmation function). The only really bad news
4. It weighs slightly more.
It's a bit taller, too.
Fred, K1FW
Fred wrote:
4. It weighs slightly more.
It's a bit taller, too.
Fred, K1FW ===
How many years have you had THAT one, Fred?
_Great_ call sign!
keith whaley
Bet you $1.00 it's a vanity call. We have a club member, George Poteat,
K4GP.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: ME-F vs ME Super
Fred wrote:
4. It weighs slightly more
Subject: Re: ME-F vs ME Super
Fred wrote:
4. It weighs slightly more.
It's a bit taller, too.
Fred, K1FW ===
How many years have you had THAT one, Fred?
_Great_ call sign!
keith whaley
Hi folks,
Thank you for your kind words regarding my situation. I appreciate it.
I guess, on the upside, I have to be thankful that the thief(ves) didn't
break any of my windows to get in and that they didn't damage the car per
se.
I also have to realise that in the grand scheme of things, this
Well..
after realising that I had placed this FS ad, I then turned around this
evening to take photos of said camera with the 50mm f1.4 lens on it.
Guess where the camera WAS? (come on.. one guess)..
I'm only just realising that the scumbags took off with the ME-F as well..
nothing is safe
Quickie for anyone willing to read:
Regarding the ME-F body.
This body is similar to the ME Super save for the autofocus connections
on the lens mount. Are there any other issues surrounding this body or is
it basically an ME Super with that bonus of autofocus ?
Thanks,
Dave
P.S. I use
on 17.01.03 15:33, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quickie for anyone willing to read:
Regarding the ME-F body.
This body is similar to the ME Super save for the autofocus connections
on the lens mount. Are there any other issues surrounding this body or is
it basically
://www.BDimitrov.de/kmp/bodies/M/ME_F.html
From what I remember, however, it takes four batteries instead of
two, and goes through them more quickly than other M-series bodies,
even when using manual focus lenses.
Joe
Quickie for anyone willing to read:
Regarding the ME-F body.
This body
It has one added bonus, you have the infocus
indicator, it actually works to.
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: Quickie for anyone willing to read:
Regarding the ME-F body.
This body is similar to the ME Super save for the
autofocus connections
on the lens mount
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Regarding the ME-F body.
This body is similar to the ME Super save for the autofocus connections
on the lens mount. Are there any other issues surrounding this body or is
it basically an ME Super with that bonus of autofocus ?
Thanks,
Dave
PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Päivä: 17. tammikuuta 2003 15:34
Aihe: Back to Pentax - ME-F ?
P.S. I use autofocus liberally even though I know this is not true
autofocus.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Joe Wilensky wrote:
I have never handled one, but I know it provides autofocus only for
the one lens made specifically for the camera (the 35-70 f/2.8 lens),
which is a whole different autofocus system than the later autofocus
Pentaxes. It does provide focus confirmation
Thanks for your comments on this..
and of course - due to said comments - I've snagged one - I only wanted the
body but there's a Sigma 2.8-4 35-70 zoom attached to it, the lens case and
a braun flash with the owners manual.
I just needed a body to drop the 50mm 1.4 onto again.
Cheers,
Dave
is I don't have the camera body to test this with, so
I'm selling it 'as is'. (Of course, the same sort of statement is
Finding pentax gear in local shops is next to impossible.
Finding a working ME-F is going to be past impossible. :)
Perhaps I'll just send it off to KEH and let them give me
Since I'm looking ot sell teh matching lens for this camera, any
idea on just what I could possibly get for it?
Prices vary a lot. On eBay, I've seen LNIB ones go for about $150
USD. (I was lucky to get a LNIB one for just under $100, but I was
lucky.) At the other extreme, I've seen used
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, Chris Brogden wrote:
them unless you have the matching 35-70/2.8 AF lens.
Anyone want to buy the lens? :)
--
http://www.infotainment.org
The destructive character is cheerful. - Walter Benjamin
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
Bob,
The ME-F is not really that rare. It appears regularly on ebay, but at
$38.50+$8 you got a nice price. Most folks don't understand that a ME-F and
an ME Super are basically the same camera with identical function.
Bob and Bob, some small differences may occasionnally be interesting
I never felt the need to look at the ME-F. I think there is only one lens
that takes advantage of the early auto focus, and that lens is a bit on the
heavy side. While I like my ME-Super, when the light meter started acting
up I tried to get it fixed and then placed it on the shelf
Someone who is collecting Pentax cameras and wants to put it on
display next to the ME and ME Super would be more interested then
the general buying public.
That is the only reason why occasionally there is some flurry of
MEF-related activity on eBay - when a black MEF is listed, or when
one
(and somewhat limited usefulness) of focus
confirmation (or of autofocus with the AF 35-70/2.8), then there may
be some MEF interest shown.
The ME-F takes 4 batteries, not 2, and seems to eat them
regularly.
Yes, it does take 4 button cells, not 2. However, it is my
experience that it doesn't use 'em
Hi Guys...
Is the ME-F a rare bird ?..With pretty much identical specs to the -Super
plus the rudimentary focus-confirmation, I'd think there would be more
demand...I just picked-up one on e-Bay, very nice shape, for $38.50 + $ 8
with only 3 bidders...There's another one (near mint
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Guys...
Is the ME-F a rare bird ?..With pretty much identical specs to the -Super
plus the rudimentary focus-confirmation, I'd think there would be more
demand...I just picked-up one on e-Bay, very nice shape, for $38.50 + $ 8
hi,
Is there a simple reason why the mirror of ME-F would be locked up, the
shutter button would depress freely, and film advance lever is jammed ?
Or does that imply a trip to the repair center ?
thanks,
nitin
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http
- Original Message -
From: Nitin Garg
Subject: me-f mirror locked up.
hi,
Is there a simple reason why the mirror of ME-F would be
locked up, the
shutter button would depress freely, and film advance lever is
jammed ?
Or does that imply a trip to the repair center ?
Replace
Tried that already :) The batteries were dead but it didnt help.
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 10:09:53PM -0600, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Nitin Garg
Subject: me-f mirror locked up.
hi,
Is there a simple reason why the mirror of ME-F would be
locked up
- Original Message -
From: Nitin Garg
Subject: Re: me-f mirror locked up.
Tried that already :) The batteries were dead but it didnt
help.
Don't laugh at this, but have you spanked it's bottom?
William Robb
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go
Hi all,
I have a chance to buy a ME F with the SMC Pentax AF Zoom 1:2.8 35-70 mm.
Both seem to be in excellent conditions.
The seller asked me 300 Euro (265 US$). It seems to me not very cheap, but I
don't know if it is actually high.
I'm collectioning the K and M bodies (well, I' m using them
ME-F 35-70 F2.8 AF on ebay,
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1327461304
__
Web-hosting solutions for home and business! http://website.yahoo.ca
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List
ME-F 35-70 F2.8 AF on ebay,
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1327461304
...but the lens doesn't work.
Fred
-
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
what's the betting that they tried it on a body other than an ME-F to decide
that it didn't work?
Regards,
/\/\ick...
-
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
My thoughts exactly, from the sounds of it he tried it
on a regular AF body expecting it to AF.
--- Mick Maguire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what's the betting that they tried it on a body
other than an ME-F to decide
that it didn't work?
Regards,
/\/\ick
I have an excellent condition Super Program, an almost mint Black ME
Super, and some sort of third-party ring flash set-up in the original
case. Plus I have an ME-F with the original Pentax 35-70/2.8 clunky AF
lens for the ME-F - all will probably end up on Ebay soon. Let me
know if anyone
I have just been looking at an ME F body, and was wondering if anyone could
enlighten me as to it's merits or lack thereof.
The said body was offered to me for $200CDN(was $250), any comments on this
price?
Also, what lens series is used with the ME F?
BTW, my 'NEW' Ricoh XR Winder-1 (eBay
on it, but newer (F and
FA) lenses are manual focus only, as the autofocus system in the ME-F is
incompatible with newer cameras.
As for the price, it seems to be fair enough to me.
Bummer about the winder.
Todd
At 08:02 PM 7/23/01 -0700, you wrote:
I have just been looking at an ME F body
My personal assessment:
The ME F is absolutely identical to the ME Super in _all_ respects except...
1.Operates autofocus with only one lens, the SMC AF 35-70/2.8. They are
relatively scarce. The autofocus motor is in the lens and batteries must be
installed in the lens. The lens is nothing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have just been looking at an ME F body, and was wondering if
anyone could enlighten me as to it's merits or lack thereof.
The said body was offered to me for $200CDN(was $250), any
comments on this price?
Also, what lens series is used with the ME F?
James
Thank you Bob S, Bob B and Todd fot the info,
I won't buy an ME-F, I'll wait for something better. Anyway, I still need to
pay for repairs to the SPF(light meter I think), I got from eBay a couple of
months ago.
Regards
James
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Dear Friends,
Sorry if I caused confusion, in buying the me-f I was looking for a camera
with focus confirmation that I could use my kmount lenses with, not an
autofocus camera! Incidentally, I really like the design of the shutter
button on the me-f, I find it much smoother to use, than many
81 matches
Mail list logo
