FS: Pentax SMC 35/2K $250
Greetings from the past. Some of you will remember me as a PDML regular, on and off, In the late 1990s and early 2000s, a devotee of Ricoh and Vivitar Series One lenses and self-styled expert on obscure third-party lenses. I don't shoot much anymore, all the less so since buying my daughters a digicam in 2005. I'm hold on to my two bodies, my Tamron 80-200/2.8 zoom, a couple 50mm lenses, a Sigma XQ 16/2.8K fisheye, and a Carl Zeiss Jena 20/2.8. But I've decided to part with my only lens of value, the Pentax SMC 35/2K. Yes, this is the original SMC, with a 52mm filter ring. It's serial number 5166100, which is the very lens seen in Boz Dimitrov's site at http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/ . That's because I bought it from Boz's friend Arnold Stark, who had provided the lens for Boz's photograph. I'm not a collector, and I have no photos of the lens, but if I had to guess I'd rate the condition EX+. Mechanically and cosmetically it's probably EX++; the aperture ring turns in precise smooth clicks, and the focus is silky smooth. But inside the lens is the usual amount of internal dust that one would expect from a lens that's 30 years old--no more, no less. I haven't noticed the dust in my prints or 6-megapixel scans. The only specimen I've seen for sale currently is the one in 99% mint condition listed for $495 at Kevin Cameras (http://www.kevincameras.com). But I want my 35/2K to stay in the PDML family, so I'm offering it here for $250 plus $10 insured shipping within USA, $15 insured shipping to Canada, $18 insured shipping anywhere else. If you're short on cash but want this lens, I'll accept $100 up front and the balance within 90 days. I accept PayPal (cash or credit). I have no 52mm front lens cap, but I'll include a Pentax SMC rear lens cap and the SMC 52mm L39 UV filter that's been protecting it since I bought it from Arnold. As soon as I press Send, I'm gonna feel heartsick over not listing this on eBay. Make me feel OK about this: Buy it and assure me that you're not rich and that you'll use the lens or protect it for posterity, and not turn around and resell it!
Re: Stop Down Metering on K, M, LX
My 20mm lens is a Carl Zeiss Jena that has been adapted from its M42 mount. I find stopdown metering helpful in a wide-angle specialty lens like this. If the viewfinder shows a bright view, I'm reminded that I've forgotten to stop down. Paul Stregevsky
Re: Image Organizer
I use ULead's PhotoImpact suite. One of its integrated programs is ULead Album, which lets you classify and sort. However, all such programs require discipline and time, so I don't really use it. Instead, I use ULead's PhotoExplorer. While it can't sort across folders or classify, it does let me add notations. More important, I can set the thumbnail size as large as 320 x 320 pixels. When your display is set to 2,048 by 1,536 (as mine is when I edit photos; 1,920 by 1,440 when I don't), the large thumbnails are welcome. Paul Stregevsky
Re: Russian lenses
I used to own both the Fisheye MC Zenitar-K (Pentax) 16mm f/2.8 and the MC Mir-47 Pentax K 2.5/20. I have since replaced them with a Sigma XQ 16/2.8K fisheye and a Carl Zeiss Jena 20/2.8 Flektogon, an M42 screwmount that has been permanently converted to a stopdown K mount. The Zenitar fisheye's colors look artificially pastel. Also, the lens is not very sharp in the corners. For not much more money, the Sigma is a much better (though much bigger) lens. It also focuses twice as close: About 6 inches, vs. 12 inches. The XQ was the middle of a succession of three fisheye 16/2/.8 lenses that Sigma introduced in the 1970s and early 1980s. It is very well built. After buying the Sigma, I sold my Pentax 17/4K; the Sigma was sharper in the corners and nearly as sharp in the center. Its only weakness is flare, and it's a big weakness. The Zenitar 20/2.5K is a more successful design. It is a true 20mm lens, while the Zeiss is more of a 21 or 21.5mm. (I compared them together.) Saturation is weak, but the colors are reasonably natural; if your main goal is a good JPEG, you can juice up the saturation on your computer. The Zeiss focuses closer (0.19m, vs. 0.3), is sharper in the corners, and has less distortion than the Zenitar. It also focuses and click-stops with a much more satisfying precision. The Zeiss uses the same optical formula as the Pentax 20/2.8 PKA; it even uses 67mm filters. The Zenitar cannot accept a front filter or an accessory hood. So the Zeiss beats the Zenitar, at least for me. Of course, the Zenitar was designed for the K mount and can meter at open aperture. And the f/2.5 aperture would give you bragging rights. If you value absence of distortion or close focus above flare resistance, the Zeiss Jena 20/4 (single coated, 77mm filter, 0.15m close focus) is an even better choice. Another top choice is the Russian-made Zenit MC Mir-20 M (20mm, f/3.5), available only in M42 screwmount. A 9-element, 8-group design, it can focus to 0.18m. It is somewhat prone to flare but in other respects is a better performer than the Mir 20/2.5K. And you can find it new for less than $100. One eBay seller sold his Pentax 20/2.8 PKA after buying this Mir; another Mir-20 owner found it as sharp as his Zeiss 20/4. My final advice: For a fisheye, get any of the old Sigmas. For a 20mm, get a used Carl Zeiss Jena (the f/2.8, f/4, or both) and a new Zenit MC Mir-20 M (f/3.5). Test each with a K mount adapter. Keep the lens you prefer and sell the other(s); you won't lose much money, and you can share your findings with us! Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Re: Split image focusing screen 4 K cameras
I used to own a KX. If you like its simplicity, rugged construction, large viewfinder, and wide film guides, please give the Ricoh XR-1 (manual exposure; = Sears KSX?), XR-2 (manual/auto), or XR-2s (manual/auto; = Sears KS Auto) a try. They are very similar to the KX in size, specs, build quality, aperture readout, and features (or lack thereof); are much brighter (in the center circle), and have a 45-degree split-image rangefinder that is extremely useful when focusing a vertical shot. The KX retains an edge in the flexibility of its mirror lockup (uncoupled from the spring-loaded timer); the quietness of its shutter (cloth vs. metal); and the fact that its shutter-speed needle moves automatically (but is more prone to fail). Last night I took my first flash shot with my KS Auto. I can't believe how easy it is. My ProMaster dedicated Ricoh module synched up with no problem; a bright red LED illuminates in the viewfinder, and I can even leave the aperture dial on A (Auto). Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Tamron Adaptall 200-500 (was: FS @ Midwest Photo)
The Tamron Adaptall 200-500 f/5.6 listed for $1943 in 1991. I have records of two prices: $465 good, bigglass.net 2002-03-10 1522 Euros secondhandcamera.de, 2002-02-05, condition AB 2-touch zoom 1:3.5 macro Close focus: 8 feet, 2 inches Length: 14.25 inches Weight: 6 lb. 95mm filter Built-in lens shade Collected comments: Bogglass.com 2002-03-10: Features built in slip out hood, rotating tripod mount, and drop in 43mm filter holder w/filter. This lens is not internal focus (front end of barrel extends and rotates as you zoom). The lens is quite large, 17 inches fully extended, but is not particularly heavy, so not hard to handle. (though definitely not handhold able). I brought it out for some shooting over the weekend and really enjoyed using it. Nice to use a zoom with so much range. You're not going to get quite the optical quality of some of the faster fixed lenses, but image quality is surprisingly good, and for the money you can't go wrong. A very good choice for those that want a long lens but don't want to dish out a lot of money. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
RE: 77 vs 85/was: www?
Alan is correct. Get the 77 for all-around use. If the 77 disappoints you for portraits, spend another $150 and get a Helios 85/1.5 (M42, preset, huge and heavy, but a great portrait lens). Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Re: 100 ISO v 200 ISO - Digital resolution
Peter Alling wrote: Even if noise was effectively the same at ISO 100 and 200 having the lower speed would allow more DOF control in bright light without using ND filters, (which can be a PITA). Point well taken, Peter. Currently my outdoor film is Fujicolor NPS 160. I chose it because it has been nicknamed Reala 160. It has the same film grain index and resolving power as Reala 100. So I figured I'd be getting something for nothing. Well, my outdoor camera's faster shutter speed is 1/1000 second, and there are times when a 100-speed film would give me the flexibility to shoot at wide apertures. I generally have two bodies on hand: One with 160, the other with 800 and flash. I used to set the 800 body at 1250 and push process, using a third body with 400 film as my flash camera. But I shoot a lot of wide angle flash (20mm), and with a diffuser in place, 400 film lacked the reach. Plus, with 800 film, the flash doesn't' produce as many white-faced close-ups. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
RE: Normal lens for ist-D, reccomendations?
Amy Hughes wrote: I was hoping someone would comment on the Sigma lens (28/1.8) you mentioned. Amy, Sigma introduced the 28/1.8 together with a 24/1.8 and 20/1.8. From the reviews I've read, the 28/1.8 is the most successful design of the three-that is to say, it truly performs well over a wide range of apertures, with reasonable corner sharpness. It won't protect against flare as well as a Pentax, but that shouldn't matter as much on an ist-D, where its effective focal length will be 42mm. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Re: Best Screw Mount Lenses (other makers)
Jim Meeks asked: As a follow-up question regarding the best Pentax screw mounts, I've heard about Zeiss and other makers like Vivitar and Soligor. Do any of these lenses compare optically or in build? How about the new Russian lenses or Cosina/Voigtlander? Thanks again. Jim, I have a great deal of experience with older third-party lenses and have amassed many pages of comments from various websites. I offer the following evaluations, from memory (some details may be slightly off): Vivitar's best lenses were designated Series One or Series 1. The Series One primes are the 28/1.9, 100/2.5 macro (1:1 magnification), 135/2.3 (1:4.5 magnification), 200/3 (1:4 magnification), 450/4.5 mirror lens (which you'll never find, and if you do, never afford), and 600/8 solid CAT lens. I believe all were available in screwmount, but only the 28/1.9 and (if available) 105/2.5 were multicoated in the screwmount version(s); the 135 and 200 were multicoated on the K-mount versions only. (Don't feel bad; some Series One primes for bayonet mounts like Canon and Olympus were single-coated.) These are the Vivitars to go for. The 105/2.5 macro is also sold as a Kiron 105/2.8, but possibly in bayonet mount only. Some non-Series One lenses are said to be as good as a Series One, notably the 100/2.8 macro (1:1), 135/2.8 macro (1:2), 28/2 macro (1:4?), and 35/1.9. I tested the 35/1.9 against the Pentax SMC 35/2K. It was no contest: The Pentax was much sharper in the corners at all apertures, at least as sharp in the center at all apertures, and at least as contrasty. As for the 28/2, I used to own its Kiron precursor (both were made by Kino Precision). It was as sharp as my Vivitar 28/1.9, but the colors were muted and contrast was deficient. Some of the Series One lenses were also marketed under the Panagor name. The 90/2.5 1:2 macro comes to mind. The Series One 24-70 f/3.5-4.8 was sold under Panagor or some other third-party brand whose name escapes me. Soligor's best lenses were designated C/D for Computer-Designed. The C/D primes included a 28/2, 35/2, 100/2 (the only 100/2 ever made in K mount, by the way); 135/1.8, and (later) 135/2.0; and 200/2.8. Most were available in screwmount. The finest-performing Soligor zoom was probably their 35-140 f/3.5 macro. Soligor images tend to have a green cast. Zeiss-specifically, Carl Zeiss Jena (CZJ) of the former East Germany-made several fine primes in M42 mount. The best were the 20/2.8 (multicoated), 20/4 (single coated but even lower in distortion), 35/2.4 (multicoated), 85/1.8 (multicoated), and 300/4 MC Auto Electric (arguably the finest M42 300mm lens ever made). The 20/2.8 and 85/1.8 use the same lens formulas as Pentax. The 20mm and 35mm CZJ primes focus remarkably close, typically yielding magnifications of 1:4 or 1:5. A 28/2.8 macro was also issued, but it was a rebadge of a Japanese lens. Among the M42 Russian lenses, the Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye is no match for the older Sigma 16/2.8 fisheyes-at least no match for the Sigma XQ, which I own. Better choices would be the Peleng 17/2.8 fisheye or Mir 20/3.5, a rectilinear lens. The Peleng 8mm fisheye is fun to use. The Helios 85/1.5 is not that sharp but makes a superb portrait lens, which a many-bladed diaphgram that yields beautiful bokeh. Speaking of Sigma, their 21-35 f/3.5-4.2 is probably the finest wide-angle zoom ever offered in M42 screwmount. It was introduced even as Sigma introduced autofocus counterparts in the various bayonet mounts! Among third-party normal lenses in M42, the best is probably the Tomioka 55/1.2. But I doubt it's better than Pentax's later 50/1.4s and 55/1.8. Several 400mm German lenses were made in M42 mount. My favorite is the Enna 400/4.5 Tele-Ennalyt, a remarkably compact design. When you can find one, it's usually less than $300. I'm not aware that Cosina/Voigtlander primes are available in M42 screwmount; just Leica screwmount. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Re: I'm Outta Here
Welcome to the other side of the Potomac, Tom. I hope you get what's coming to you. :) Paul Stregevsky
Samsung 5MP camera phone will use Pentax camera module
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/041020/323/f4wod.html Paul Stregevsky
Re: Long zoom recommendations
Peter asked: I was thinking about A 70-210/4... Is it really that good? Yes, Peter, it is that good. Pentax made three or four manual-focus zooms whose results are, in every respect, indistinguishable from a great prime. The 70-210/4 is one of them. The others that come to mind are the 35-105/3.5 PKA and 75-150/4 (M? K?). Another PDMLer writes that the Tokina ATX 100-300/4 is available now at KEH for less than $200. If you don't mind manual focus--or, indeed, if you prefer it--grab it. This is one of those third-party lenses that you'll find every week on eBay--in the wrong mount. If you don't like it, you won't lose much in the resale. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
RE: 60mm - 65mm Lens for K Mount
I just searched eBay for 60mm and found these primes for 35mm cameras: Contax 60mm F2.8C 1:2 Makro-Planar T Leica Classic Elmarit R 60mm 1:1 MACRO 65mm f/3.5 Elmar This is a special lens for the Visoflex III reflex housing for Leica M rangefinder Nikon 60mm micro nikkor autofocus lens (also found as Nikkor 60mm f2.8 AF-D CLOSEUP Lens) Yashica 60mm Macro Autofocus lens for Yashica AF cameras (f/2.8) For rangefinder: 60mm Konica Hexanon with Finder: Koni-Omega 58/60mm wide angle lens, which is a Zeiss Biogon related non-retrofocus design. I wonder why 60mm became a popular focal length for macros. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Re: Value of SMCP 35/2.0
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:11:45 -0700 From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Value of SMCP 35/2.0 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Shel wrote: Any thoughts on what a reasonable eBay price for the above lens might be? I don't know about eBay, but online dealers are charging about $160 to $200. It's come down about 25 percent since 2000, probably because the istD has made the 35/2 FA more desirable and the 35/2K more available. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Re: Long zoom recommendations
If you can spare $2000, the Sigma 120-300/2.8 AF. Otherwise, the Tokina 100-300/4 AF, which is said to be even better than its manual-focus forebear. Big and heavy, but a fine performer. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Re: 60mm - 65mm Lens for K Mount
I looked at my files of K and M42 lens photographs in the folder, 60mm to 79mm. I found nothing that begins with a 6; just the Pentax 77mm FA Limited, a Carl Zeiss Jena 75/1.5 Biotar in M42, and and a Voigtlander Color Heliar 75/2.5K. No 58mm lenses, either. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Re: Flash dedication ?
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:35:06 -0400 Collin wrote: I picked up an Achiever flash with Ricoh module. Is it the same as Pentax? I can't recall whether Achiever is another brand of my Ritz Quantaray 9500, which uses brand-specific modules, too. For the Quantaray, I investigated this very question about two years ago, when I wanted to use the Quantaray on a Ricoh XR-P, which supports TTL flash. Ritz's national tech support line tried to answer my question, by email and phone, but they seemed unable to grasp the subtleties of the question. Here are the facts: - Ritz sells (or sold) both a Pentax manual-focus module (PX) and a Ricoh module (RC). - I never owned the Ritz Ricoh module, because, as I recall, there was something confusing about the Ritz part numbers or the box. Either both modules bore the same part number, or both used the same box, which may have said Pentax manual focus or Pentax/Ricoh manual focus. - I later bought two Ricoh-specific (RC) modules in the Promaster line (Penn Camera's line). I have the box in front of me: FTM 5000 module for Ricoh, no. 2659, made in Hong Kong. In the ProMaster line, both the box and the module are labeled as Ricoh only. - When I informed Ritz that Promaster's line had separate part numbers, so why did Ritz have one (or something like that), they became as confused as I was. Before my XR-P failed, I do remember using it with the ProMaster Ricoh module, without problems. I didn't have the courage to try the PX module; I was afraid I might short something out. This question is very timely, for just today I removed the Quantaray flash from my Super Program, swapped out my Pentax module for the Ricoh module, set the Ricoh module to Automatic and f/5.6, and mounted the rig on my Sears KS Auto (Ricoh XR-2s). Lo and behold, a red LED illuminates in the viewfinder! The Pentax and Ricoh modules look identical, in their controls and their contact pins. I can't wait to use my Sears bodies with autoflash. In a dim auditorium, I find it much easier to focus the Sears than my Super Program. The only reason I kept the Super Program was for the TTL flash, but autoflash (non-TTL) isn't that hard at all. I may soon be down to zero Pentax bodies and my one remaining Pentax lens SMC 35/2K). I hope I'm not kicked off the list... Paul Stregevsky
Re: 60mm - 65mm Lens for K Mount
Peter J. Alling wrote: If I remember correctly Cosina's K mount 1.2 normal lens was a 58mm. They are apparently hard to find and rather expensive thought. Cosina's K-mount f/1.2 normal lens was 55mm, like all other third-party f/1/2 lenses in K mount (Porst, Rikenon, Revuenon, Vivitar) or screwmount (Fujinon, Tomioka, Vivitar, Yashinon). The Cosinon's filter size was 58mm. Konica made a 57/1.2. Minolta may have made a 58/1.2. Someone made a 60mm in th e1960s or 1970s, because I own several old books on how to take better pictures, and I kept seeing the 60mm pop up in the credits. Paul Stregevsky
nondedicated, non-TTL flash: How difficult?
How much harder is a nondedicated, non-TTL flash to use than a dedicated TTL flash? I'm looking at the flash instructions for my Ricoh XR-2s (Sears KS Auto), and it looks like a lot of work. I can't use aperture priority exposure; rather, I must select a shutter speed, divide the distance into the guide number, and use the quotient as my aperture--only if my flash is on full (I assume). If I change my subject distance, I must change the aperture. Sounds like a lot of work! Which attribute would go further to simplify the routine: a flash that's dedicated but not TTL? Or TTL vs. merely dedicated? Does anyone here still use a nondedicated flash? If so, why? Paul Stregevsky
Re: Sondage: fixe Lens for travel
Shen wrote: I have owned also a Konica auto S3 (rangefinder). it is small, easy to use and the lens is excellent. I dout if the quality is the same as a SMCP-M40mm/2.8 ?! Is it comparable so that is the question. Shen, The S3 may be the best fixed-lens rangefinder ever made. Ultrahigh resolution, small size, shutter priority, and an advanced, intelligent TTL flash. The results should come close to the SMC 35/2 FA. Paul Stregevsky
Re: Sondage: fixe Lens for travel
Three years ago, my family visited New York. My wife allowed me to take along only one lens. I took a 50/1.4PKA. However, indoors and out, I would have been better served by a 35/2. When you need a grab shot, there isn't time to back up to widen your view. When in doubt, go wide; you can always crop. On the other hand, if your 50 is much better than your 35, use the 50. If you shoot in manual focus, a 50/1.4 or 50/1.7 will focus more easily than a 35/2. On my lunchtime walk I now use a 50. Not because it's sharper--my 35 is a Pentax SMC 35/2K--but because my 50/1.7 and my camera are both Sears, and I get a kick out of startling people who want to know the brand of my beautiful black camera/winder/lens and how much I paid ($70). Paul Stregevsky
Re: Super Takumare 35/3.5
DJE wrote: I appear to have a lemon. My Super Takumar 35/3.5, s/n 4137xxx, tests as the worst 35mm prime I own in terms of sharpness and contrast. It appears to be undamaged physically and optically and to focus correctly. Recently I bought a Vivitar Series One 24-48/3.8PK zoom, legendary for its sharpness. The glass is clean front and back. Well, my first roll (shot at f/5.6) was a disappointment; the focusing looked off from front to back. All frames had been shot with flash at 1/125 second, so I ruled out camera shake. The I did the bright light test and saw a haze (fungus?) across the entire surface of at least one inner lens. I've sold the lens to a PDMLer who is willing to have it cleaned. Paul Stregevsky
Re: Was this a good deal on a Sigma macro?
$170 for a Sigma 105/2.8 EX macro in Mint condition? Sure is. KEH has two for sale, in EX and EX+ condition, for $265 and $286. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
432mm@f/2.8, image stabilized, 5 megapixels, $600!
Check out the Steve's Digicams review of Panasonic's new Lumix DMC-FZ20, a 5-megapixel, image stabilization digital camera with a Leica DC Vario-Elmarit 12x zoom that reaches 432mm at f2.8. The sensor is a tiny 1/2.7 inch CCD. But for covering outdoor sports, it's an amazing deal at $600. http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/fz20.html Paul Stregevsky
Re: OT Flooded with 50mm macros?
Chris Brogden wrote:I I found a Vivitar that did the trick. It's a 55mm f2.8 MF macro that does 1:1 without an adapter. It's also available under the name Panagor. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Viewfinders with an aperture window (was: Re: *ist series support for setting the aperture on the lens(was: ist D)
Don't forget early Ricoh XR bodies, like the XR-1 XR-1s (manual exposure only), XR-2 and XR-2s (manual or aperture priority), and their Sears twins, like my two KS Auto bodies. Some later XR bodies, too (XR-6? XR-7? XR-10?), and their Sears twins. Doe any Chinon bodies have an aperture window? AFAIK, Pentax was the only make to include an aperture window in a compact body (MX). Modern Photography or Popular Photography once wrote that many OM fans never forgave Olympus for omitting this feature on its OM line. Paul Stregevsky Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Eyepiece acessory size for Ricoh XR?
I want to add a teardrop-shaped rubber eyecup to my new Ricoh XR-2s. None of the third-party eyecups (like Kalt) claim to fit Ricoh, but I know that at least one brand does; I use one on my first XR-2s. I just can't recall whether the package said it was for Minolta, Olympus, or who. Can anyone tell me what other SLR lines use the same eyepiece accessories as Ricoh XR? Paul Stregevsky Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Finally, a 24-85mm digicam (Nikon Coolpix 8400)
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0409/04091602nikoncp8400.asp Paul Franklin Stregevsky
SD cards on ist DS (was: Re: Photokina)
Size. Pentax evidently is betting they'll gain more sales by offering the smallest DSLR than they'll lose by forfeiting the upward compatibility with the DS's big brother. Joseph Tainter wrote: Why did Pentax use an SD card in the *ist DS? That is a big strike against buying one as a back-up body. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Sears multicoated primes: Are they XR Rikenons, or Rikenon Ps?
I recently ordered a Sears Auto 1.7 MC lens. I've also seen a Sears Auto 1.4 MC lens. Neither has a P (program) setting. I know that these are made by Rikenon. My question is, are these multicoated versions of the XR 50mm lenses (which were single coated)? Or non-P versions of the Rikenon P lenses (which were multicoated)? Another curiosity: None of the Sears 50mm MC photos I've seen have the beautiful blue-purple color that other Rikenon multicoated I've owned (XR 300/4.5, XR 28-100/4, and 50/1.4P). The coloring looks more orange-yellow. Is the Sears 50/2 multicoated? Probably not, given its bargain position and the fact that not even Ricoh multicoated the 50/2P. Looking at photos on eBay, I can tell you that the Sears Auto MC 1.4 bears an exact likeness to the XR Rikenon 1.4. The XR's aperture scale used straight tick marks; the P switched to angled rays. To see these lenses, search for Sears 50mm on eBay. Then search again, this time selecting completed auctions only in the Advanced Search box. Paul Stregevsky Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Zeiss (Contax?) digital rangefinder?
This just in from Cameraquest's SLR Manual Focus discussion list, posted by Douglas M. Sharp under the subject line, Re: [CVUG]Photokina -Zeiss Camera revealed: Just picked this up, The mystery camera in all it's glory. http://www.zeiss.de/C12567A8003B8B6F/GraphikTitelIntern/28ZeissIkon/$File/BwP- 28.jpg This is a kick in the short and curlies for Leica if it is a Digital RF, it certainly doesn't look as if it wasn't a hurried job either. Douglas Paul Stregevsky Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Fisheye-Only Shooting of a Small Town Festival
Yesterday was my town's annual festival, Poolesville Day. Inspired by Alan Chan's virtuosity with his Pentax SMC 15/3.5K, I decided to shoot the day's events using nothing but a fisheye. Hey--if Henri Cartier Bresson shot the world with only (or mostly) a 50... Bad idea. Few scenes looked interesting from a fisheye perspective. Scenes that benefited from a fisheye: The circular town center; an historic old house with an American flag draped over the porch; wagons full of kids waiting for the parade to begin; the library's book-sale tables and book-sale room. Scenes that didn't benefit from a fisheye: Everything else I saw, including the parade itself, crowd scenes, and vendor booths. Well, in a week or so I'll receive my Vivitar Series One 24-48/3.8K from Foro- Schneider of Austria. That promises to be a decent festival lens. Paul Stregevsky Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Old K mounts at town festival
At yesterday's town festival, I was shooting beside a woman with a compact digicam. She took an interest in my gear. This digicam (a Kodak) has 6.1 megapixels. But I still like to use my SLR. What is it? Oh, not much; a Sears. I explained that I own and love two Sears KS Auto bodies, which are rebranded Rikenon XR-2s bodies. I told her how the Sears nameplate helps me reassure guards that I'm not a pro so that I can shoot freely where they might restrict me if my camera bore a respected nameplate. I wish I had a fisheye, like yours, she said. But they're kind of expensive. I suggested she pick up a Zenitar 16/2.8K for about 100 bucks. She had no idea a fisheye cost so little. Later, I saw a 45-ish man wearing a zipped-up never-ready SLR case. What kind of camera is in there? I asked. Oh, I don't remember; something old, he apologized. He unzipped the case, and there was a K1000 fitted with a Rikenon 50/2P. My son is taking a photography course, he explained, so I decided to learn with him. I assured him that he had a great combination, not just for learning but for shooting great pictures. I, too, use the Rikenon 50/2P on Pentax bodies when I need a normal lens that will deliver corner sharpness at wide apertures. In my controlled test shots of a newspaper page, the Rikenon 50/2P was the only lens that rivaled or surpassed the Pentax SMC 35/2K in corner sharpness at every aperture. In this sense, it's more versatile than my SMC 55/1.8K, which doesn't really shine till f/5.6 or f/8. Paul Stregevsky Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Rikenon 50/1.4P fetches $150
K mount users appear to be waking up to the nice features (creamy bokeh, gorgrous color, and 3D sharpness) of this late Ricoh lens: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewItemcategory=30077item=3838128611rd=1 For those reading this message in the archives after October 2004, there were 10 bidders and 29 bids. The starting bid was $5.00. My tests find that the multicoated Rikenon 50/2P delivers better resolution at all apertures from f/2 onward, especially in the corners. However, the 50/2P is single coated and is no match for the 1.4P's coloring and bokeh. As I recall, my former Pentax 50/1.4PKA was perhaps 90 percent as beautifully colored and bokeh'd as the 1.4P, as sharp as the 50/2P in the center, and 90 percent as sharp as the 50/2P in the corners. Of course, it is also SMC multicoated coated. If limited to a single 50mm lens, I'd go with the Pentax. Paul Stregevsky Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
black cloaking tape (was: Re: istD in style)
A wise man once said, Whenever people draw up a list, they leave something out. 4. To make a black camera even less conspicuous. 5. By creating an all-black camera, to impress chicks. Cotty wrote: When I see a camera that has the name blanked off, there can only be one of the following reason's why: 1) The camera is being used in a shot on film/tv/advertising and the name is not needed. 2) The owner is ashamed of the camera. 3) The owner is mad as a March hare. Paul Stregevsky Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
wide-only-and wide-to-normal zooms (was: Re: Fisheye-Only Shooting of a Small Town Festival)
Jon M wrote: I'm tempted to get a SMC Pentax-M 24-35 or 24-50. Or even an aftermarket 19ish- 35ish. From the opinions and ratings I've gathered, these are probably the best of the third-party manual-focus zooms that begin at 17 to 24 and end at 35 to 50: 20-35 Tokina AT-X f/3.5 to 4.5 (manual or autofocus versions) 21-35 Sigma f/3.5 to 4.2 (may be more like a 22 to 33mm) Soligor 24-45mm f/3.5 to 4.5; 24-48 Vivitar Series One f/3.8 The 17- and 19-to-anythings of that era were not in the same class, nor was Vivitar's later 24-48/3.5, nor Tamron's SP 24-48 f/3.5 to 3.8. Some would include in the A list the 24-40 Tokina AT-X f/2.8 (a reworked version of the Tokina-made Sun 24-40/3.5 macro, which was also sold as the Hoya 25-42mm f/3.5. But I've read mixed reviews of the 24-40/2.8, and I question how its designed managed to deliver an f/2.8 maximum aperture while maintaining the Sun's 72mm filter size. (then again, Pentax squeezed a 50/1.2 behind a 52mm filter ring.) I've read mixed reviews of the Tamron 20-40 f/2.7 to 3.5, an autofocus lens. Its range is certainly attractive, as 40mm approaches the 43.5mm true normal focal length. Presumably the wide-end zooms of the autofocus era have surpassed these older designs. Sigma recently introduced not only a 24-60/2.8 but a second-generation 24-70/2.8. Certainly Pentax's own 24-35/3.5M remains a highly credible performer, if you find that rather modest zoom range sufficient. And many are happy with Pentax's 20-35/4 FA, though it is more of a consumer-grade lens than a pro lens. Paul Stregevsky Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Re: wide-only-and wide-to-normal zooms (and ultra-long primes)
Jim Colwell wrote: My 35mm film sights are now set on small and close moving targets - I'd like to get a SMC Pentax-FA* ED IF 400/5.6, but may settle for a Sigma AF Macro APO 400/5.6. ... I need AF and a closer minimum focus distance - any comments or suggestions for AF 400's ? Jim, I can't speak from experience, but from all I've read, the Sigma 300/4 and 400/5.6 AF Macro lenses are winners. They perform well optically and they can ffocus closer than anyone else's 400/5.6. However, I don't know how quickly or accurately they autofocus. Paul Stregevsky Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Pentax at Hooters
Today was the last day for a friend at work; he was laid off. To give him a proper farewell, about ten of the guys took him to Hooters. I was the self-designated photographer. For those of you outside of America, Hooters is basically a chain of restaurants for businessmen. Though its icon is a hooting owl, the icon is a decoy; hooters is American slang for breasts. Hooters girls, while seldom stacked, wear outfits that push their assets out and up. They also wear short shorts. You can check out the restaurant's website at http://www.hooters.com . Anyway, I thought the lunch would take place inside, so I filled my Super Program with 400-speed color print film, and packed along a diffused flash, my SMC 35/2K lens (bought from Arnold Stark-the specimen shown in Boz's site), and my Zeiss Jena 20/2.8. As it turned out, the day was sunny and cloudless and we dined outside. I would have used 160-speed film, I thought. But then I started shooting-wide table shots, deep table shots. I shot mostly at f/9.5, adding 2 stops compensation to bring out the detail in the three African Americans in our group. So the extra film speed came in handy; I was able to hand the camera to our waitress, confident that the shutter speed was sufficiently fast to neutralize any camera shake. I had a nice chat with a fellow at my table who has been studying the digicam market for two years, deciding what to buy. He currently shoots with a Canon A-1 (not AE-1). He's thinking of getting a Fuji S3 and using on it exclusively-are you ready?-a 28-300! The table next to ours was being served by one of the most breathtakingly loveliest brunettes I had ever set eyes on. (I was told that she also models.) But how could I explain to her-or to my wife-why I wanted to photograph her? Luckily, all eight waitresses gathered 'round my work friend and posed while I snapped away. My film will be developed by Dale Labs in Florida. I'm thinking I should have this roll returned to one of my buddies. The film will arrive home before I do, and I wouldn't put it past my wife to rip up the prints and break the CD. (We're talking about a woman who destroyed the only shots of me and my 1979 college girlfriend. The girlfriend and I were simply enacting a medieval court scene, in costume. I would have sent the photos to my brother or to the ex-girlfriend, who lives thousands of miles away.) Nonetheless, my lunch at Hooters was, shall we say, an uplifting experience.. Paul Franklin Stregevsky
Re: Tan's new assets...
And I thought I was the only perv among us who had her original cryptic notice figured out... Anyway, Tanya, I liked the foot shots shown from the patient's point of view. I routinely take shots (or have the nurse do so) during office procedures at the doctor's or dentist's. The docs love to get the pics. I have shots from my 1991 foot surgery, taken by me with a Minox 35, where I afterward told the nurse that she gives good foot. (No one had ever told her that.) I have me donating whole blood and wired up to donate platelets. Last year, I held out a fisheye lens on a Super Program to capture my root canal dental surgery. And in two hours, I'll be undergoing endodontic surgery, where I'll get some nice closeups with my Carl Zeiss Jena 20/2.8. Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Re: lens coloration (was: Re: Re: Difference between 50mm A and 50
Gonz wrote: Wanna buy a Chinon? No thanks, Gonz. I don't go out of my way to buy third-party lenses. I buy them when they offer something I specifically want. I suppose the Chinon 55/1.2K would be interesting, but my next normal lens will be a Pentax 50/1.4 PKA. The only Chinon I'd love to have is their 45/2.8 pancake lens, the metal version of the 4-element, 3-group Rikenon. The Chinon is said to be an underrated jewel. Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Scarce K mount lenses (15, 85, 105, 120) for sale in Russia
Some of the lists's favorite K-mount lenses are for sale in Russia at http://www.ekta-f.ru/app/pentax.html I can't figure out whether the posted prices are in Euros or what. Can one of our Russian speakers tell us, and also tell us where the seller will ship to? One third-party lens stands out: Tokina RMC 28-85/4. JCO found it to rival a great prime lens in contrast, sharpness, and saturation. Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Re: Difference between 50mm A and 50 mm M.
As a rule, anytime you have two lenses that are similar in focal length, it's useful to differentiate them to add flexibility. For example, I use two normal lenses: 1. f/2 to f/4: Rikenon 50/2P 2. f/5.6 to f/16: Pentax SMC 55/1.8K I prefer the Rikenon for available light; otherwise, I prefer the colors and corner sharpness of the Pentax. However, when I'm not sure whether I'll be using flash, it's often difficult to decide which lens to take. in an effort to streamline my lens set, I am seriously considering selling both and getting a Pentax 50/1.4 PKA. I used to own one--it was my first prime--but I sold it after two years. Now I look over the beautiful shots I took with the 50/1.4 PKA in all conditions, and I ask myself, What was I thinking? Have you considered making your second lens a 50mm of 55mmm macro, such as the lightweight Pentax 50/2.8 PKA? Henry's in Canada is listing two in Condition 8 for $38.61 (US) each. Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
lens coloration (was: Re: Re: Difference between 50mm A and 50 mm M.)
Shel wrote: One thing that everyone seems to be missing is that the M and the A lenses may provide different results wrt color. That may be an issue for some people under some circumstances, such as photographing the same subject using the different lenses. True enough, but the lack of consistent coloration doesn't bother this bargain hunter. My eight lenses come from seven manufacturers (Sigma, Carl Zeiss Jena, Pentax, Ricoh, Tokina, Tamron, and Vivitar). I guess I should get a Cosina, Zenitar, and Soligor to round things out Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Re: Nimh batteries
Herb Chong wrote: i also strongly recommend a charger that monitors each cell as it charges. it will have one status LED for each cell. you'll get more useful capacity and longer useful life this way. rg replied: Who makes chargers like these? Maha, model C-401FS: http://www.mahaenergy.com/store/item.asp?idproduct=178 I have one and I love it. Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
SMC 18/3.5s for sale (was: Re: Seen on E-bay)
Jim Colwell wrote: That makes two SMC Pentax 18/3.5 sold on eBay in August - I bought the other one. It cost less than this one (3835670112), but not a lot less... There are two more for same at Kevin Cameras (http://www.kevincameras.com), for $675 and $850. Plus other rare goodies, including an SMC 105/2.8K. Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
135/3.5K vs. 135/3.5M mislistings (was: Re: The meaning of letters in lens names?)
In eBay listings, and even on dealer websites, the 135/3.5M is very often misleadingly listed as a 135/3.5K. I've even seen the 135/3.5K listed as a 135/3.5M, even though the deesignation M is nowhere to be found on the lens. If there'a s clear photo of the lens from the front, you can look for the M (or its absence) or perhaps see the marked filter size (52mm for the K, 49mm for the M.) Otherwise, it's best to contact the seller and make sure the K is really a K, or the M is really an M. Only slightly less common is a 50/2 lens with a BIN price of, say, $40 being listed on eBay as a 50/1.2. Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Re: Another 7 MP camera
Who needs another digicam that shoots no wider than 35mm? For my shooting style, it's 28 or forget it. In fact, I was advising another advanced amateur (a former Spotmatic user in his fifties) who's poised to buy a serious digicam. When I told him that most models with built-in lenses can't reach 28mm at their wide end, he was astonished-and grateful for the warning.
How wide a step-up ring to avoid vignetting (Vivitar 24-50 zoom)?
While I don't yet own the Vivitar 24-48/3.8 zoom, I'm scouring the ads for a filter and hood. The lens has a 77mm filter ring. But if I use a 77mm filter, I'd have to buy a slim model, and that's expensive-especially when I select a model with threads in front. I've also had inconsistent success screwing a threaded hood into a slim filter. So I'm thinking of using a step-up ring with a wider filter of standard thickness. For the hood, I'd like to use a model that's short and straight (cylindrical), like a Contax #1. (search for Contax AND hood in eBay and you'll probably find a photo.) That will keep the lens compact while letting me more easily fit it to a lens cap. My question is, how wide should I step up? If I step up just 5mm, to 82mm, will I risk vignetting from the hood? Would 86mm be safer? I don't want to use two step up rings: lens to filter, and filter to hood. Does anyone just punch out the glass in a second (cheap) filter and use the remaining metal ring as a hood?
Filter question: UV or just clear protection?
I like to use a UV filter on each lens to protect the front glass. I'm now shopping for an 86mm filter, and it's hard to find a top-end (Contax, Pentax, Heliopan, B+W, or Hoya SHMC), multicoated UV filter in that size, in used condition (and thus at a used price). I can get a used Contax clear protection filter (model 86 P) at a good price ($31). It has no UV protection, but according to the Adorama listing (New), it is multicoated. I am taking this on faith, because I can't find it confirmed anywhere else, including Kyocera's site. In 86mm, a new Contax Protection filter costs abotu $8 less the UV filter. This will be for my Vivitar 24-48/3.8, for which I just placed an order. If I get the clear filter instead of UV, what will I be missing? Will my outdoor shots be any less sharp? Can anyone confirm that the Contax Protection filters are multicoated? Paul Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Re: Quiz #2.1
Bob wrote: Some don't seem to know the definitions of exotic and/or Abstract. Here's my working definition. Exotic means she's nekkid. Abstract means you can't tell that she's nekkid. I assume that this was inspired by Southern (American South) humorist Ludlow Porch, who explained for Yankees the difference between naked and nekked: Naked means that two people are naked. Nekked means that two people are naked and up to something. Paul Stregevsky Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Re: FS: Vivitar Series One 135/2.3K lens, $200
Norm Baugher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:[$200] seems a bit pricey for a 135/2.3 (not saying you're wrong), is that lens really that expensive? Norm, My extensive records of prices include only three sales of the 135/2.3 in K mount: $165 by Wall Street Camera in 1999 $136 on US Ebay in 2002 (the one I bought) $200 from PDML's John Mustarde in October 2002. You may be thinking of prices for the screwmount version, which is single coated and considerably easier to find. The real cost of a 135/2.3K is measured by the hours spent searching for one for months or years. Yes, my price was on the high side, but I figured it was worth a modest premium in exchange for limiting potential buyers to those who subscribe to PDML. In other words, the buyer would not have to compete with far-flung, well-heeled collectors. By the way, it sold in 10 minutes. Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Re: Soligor 100/2 [Was Re: FS: Vivitar Series One 135/2.3K lens, $200]
Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Paul, Welcome back. I bought a Soligor 100/2 after reading your comments on the list (archive actually). Did you finally get one yourself? Kostas, I ordered one from Mr. CAD in the UK in December 2001, then chickened out and canceled my order. If you have one, I believe you have the only K mount lens in the 90-105mm class that is faster than f/2.5. How is it? Get your free email account at mail2go.com today! Click here http://www.mail2go.com to open your account.
Re: pocketeable cameras I've had
Daphne wrtoe: hmm.. why do I get the feeling that my little narrative wont satisfy you one bit? :- Are you kidding? I smiled all the way through it. And learned a good deal, too. It's amazing what I miss by reading about a camerea instead of using it. as for Shel, he knows my advice! Rollei 35, bien sur! ...which is why, as a write, a delightfully small, idiosyncratic Rollei 35 SE is snugged in my shirt pocket for the next week, compliments of a coworker. It will mark the first time I rely on manual exposure. Shel, I think Daphne's right; this is your camera. As for the S vs. the SE, do you prefer seeing your exposure indicator on the top panel (S, via needle) or in the viewfinder (SE, via 3 LEDs)? (or both, Yashica Electro). - 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 .
Goodbye (leaving the list)
It's been a thrilling few months, but I'm afraid that my participation in three camera-related lists has taken me away from freelance essay writing (spell-checked, unlike my postings) and my wife and girls. WIth my lens collection complete, I am quitting all the list (and two others: rangefinders and streetshooting) so that I can reclaim a life, and my family can reclaim me. These months have given me the chance to return in kind the help that I received when building my SLR kit, with its collection of some 17 lenses. Until recently, I shot only candid and slice-of-life people shots. Thanks to this list, I've been able to expand my vistas to include friends' weddings, indoor and outdoor sports, indoor theater, and even a bit of nature and macro photography. On another front, I recently had the chance to begin mentoring a budding photographer. I was at an exhibition of middle-school art, when the art teacher's 16-year-old daughter inquired about the Pentax SLR hanging from my neck. Last year my father gave me his old MX, she told me, and ever since, I've been studying photography. You're kidding! I exclaimed. I've been looking for someone like you. I've amasses a large set of world-class fast lenses, and I'll never use most of them as often as they deserve to be used. I'd love to lend them to you, 3 or 4 at a time. You could see how the focal length suits you. And with lenses of this quality, you'll see how good your photos can be. Are you interested? Really? Of course! A week later, she and her mother came by, and the girl spent a good hour trying out different lenses, finally leaving with my Carl Zeiss Jena 20/2.8, Pentax SMC 24/2.8, Pentax SMC 35/2M, and Pentax SMC 105/2.8K. I also lent her a few collections of photographs taken by photojournalists, her favorite genre and mine. Also, I gave her an entry form for the photography contest being held by our county library system. She'll be trading the original lenses and books for new choices this weekend. I have spent probably hundreds of hours collecting opinions, ratings, prices, and facts and figures about Pentax and Pentax-compatible 35mm lenses. It would be a pity if my 11x17-inch chart--now 78 pages long--would no longer be of use to anyone. If anyone is interested in having a copy in PDF, I'll be glad to email it to you (not spell-checked or cleaned up in about 18 months!). Warm regards, Paul Franklin Stregevsky, Technical Writer NEC America, Inc. Mail Stop VA-4610 14040 Park Center Rd. Herndon, VA 20171-3227 [EMAIL PROTECTED] W: (703) 834-4648 H: (301) 349-5243 [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 .
Great Deals on EBay this weekend!
In the United States, the three-day Memorial Day weekend begins Friday, May 25. If last February's Presidents' Day weekend was any indication, it will be a great time to shop on EBay! Many avid American EBayers will be traveling or enjoying the outdoors. I began using EBay just before Presidents Day weekend. Having heard how ridiculously prices can climb, I pledged to sit it out and watch. To my astonishment and anguish, a Pentax 15/3.5 PKA went for $500 instead of $900 to $1200! It would be nice to see our own list members grab some of the most sought-after stuff--especially at Buy It Now prices. - 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 .
pocketeable cameras I've had
For cryin' out loud, Daphne, speak up! Why so many? How do these cameras compare? How is it that you gave up all but one particular Rollei and returned to a Minox? You may be able to spare Shel a lot of search time. (must...resist...making comments about women who can't make up their mind...) - 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 .
Black ME Super
How rare is a black ME Super? Boz's site confirms that it was made, but I can't recall seeing an ad for one until now: ME-Super (black) c/w 50mm £120 at London Camera Exchange in Farehams second hand stock list.([EMAIL PROTECTED]) or http://www.lcegroup.co.uk (though stock is not listed online; you get the list by signing up for a weekly email). - 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: Pocketable Camera
Dan, Thanks for brining the lineup up-to-date. I was unaware that you could get spot metering on a contemporary compact. With most the models that you've named have fine lenses and other strong points, their extensive automation makes them a different breed from the flexible manual-focus models of the 70s. Among the lunder-$300 contemporary compacts, few permit you to override the film's DX setting for an entire roll. If She wanted to rate a 400 film at 250, he'd have to override each shot, frame by frame. The highly regarded 28mm, f/2.8 Ricoh GR1, like the 28/3.5 Olympus XA-4 of the 1980s, offers full-program exposure only--no program shift. Even if it allows exposure compensation, you're at the mercy of the program that Ricoh has built into the exposure curve. You have no knowledge of, or control over, the shutter speed or aperture being used. Of course, virtually all compacts but the old Yashicas allow you to depress the shutter release halfway to lock the exposure. It sounds as though Shel is looking for a camera that can serve him without flash. On these grounds alone, I'm afraid all the zoom models except perhaps the Contax Tvs III and Rollei QZ35 must be ruled out. Not only are zooms slower than the fixed-lens models; on most of them--and, alas, on the GR-1--at low EVs the built-in flash will activate by default unless your fingernail can press a tiny button two or three times to tell the flash, No thanks. Your preference to deactivate the autoflash is not remembered from roll to roll, nor from frame to frame. The Contax T3, like the T2 and the Tvs III zoom, offers autofocus or zone focus only. The original Contax T*, on the other hand (1985 to 1991?), is a manual-focus metal jewel that capably fits all of Shel's criteria except price. It sells used for $375 to $450, more for black. The T*'s flash slips onto the side, adding no height or depth; just length, which actually improves the grip. I believe the T*'s Zeiss Sonnar lens was the first of three compact-camera lenses that Modern or Popular Photography found to be the equal of the Rollei Sonnar. The same accolade was later bestowed on the Ricoh GR1 and Rollei's own QZ35. The Minox coming darn close in the 70s and was improved once or twice in the nineties. The Rollei QZ35s are an engineering marvel that failed spectacularly in the marketplace, plunging their $1800 street price to $850 in about a year. They are considerably larger and heavier than Shel wants. Minolta's TC-1, the smallest full-frame 35 ever made, is the only manual-focus camera in Dan's group. It is a mini-marvel scale focuser. Heads probably rolled at Minox for taking a back seat in the how-do-they-do-it department. One of the TC-1's best attributes, besides its 1/750th-second shutter (correct?) and tiny size: It looks like a toy! No one will suspect that its owner is Shel Belinkoff, black-and-white streetshooter extraordinaire. Unfortunately, used TC-1s are scarce and cost upward of $450. Finally, regarding most of the contemporary offerings: Could Shel really be content with autofocus? On an AF SLR, at least, you can see what you're focusing on. With a non-SLR, you never know for sure. The only autofocus compacts that I can see Shel being ecstatic with are the Nikon 35 Ti (35/2.8) and 28 Ti (28/2.8), and the Konica Hexar (35/2), preferably the original model with the silent winder and rewinder. The Nikons have three cool analog dials on the top panel to show you exposure information and more. But all are about twice Shel's target weight and three times his target price. Personally, I'd take a Minox 35 GT-E. For Shel, the consummate thinking street photographer, my recommendation remains the quirky but awesome Rollei 35S or 35 SE. Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Subject: Hi Shel, Paul covered the original compacts very thoroughly. If you are looking for something of more recent vintage you might want to check out some of these (all feature exp. compensation, many have adj. diopters, spot metering, and metal bodies): Ricoh GR1s, 28mm (Camera Traders Ltd. has lowest US $, BH has specs) Canon Sure Shot Classic 120 Zoom, 38-120mm Contax T3, 35mm Zeiss Sonnar T* Contax Tvs III, 30-60mm Zeiss T* Vario Sonnar Fuji DL Super Mini Zoom, 28-56mm Konica LEXIO-70 Zoom, 28-70mm Leica C1 Zoom, 38-105mm Vario-Elmar Leica Minilux, 40mm Summarit Leica Minilux Zoom, 35-70mm Vario-Elmar Leica Z2X Zoom, 35-70mm Vario-Elmar Minolta TC-1, 28mm Rollei Prego 115 Zoom, 38-115mm Rollei QZ35(all versions) - 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 .
Fast Zeiss 85s in M42?
I found these curiosities under Pentax Screw Mount at http://www.midwestphoto.com/WVCollectibles.html 75 f1.5 Biotar (coated), 9 $569 85 f1.8 Zeiss Pancolor w/case caps, 9+ $375 Those are U.S. dollars. Does anyone know how they measure up against the SMC Takumar 85/1.8? - 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: Chromogenic BW Film
Indeed, a key attribute of these films is that you need not commit the entire roll to one ISO setting. Rather, you can choose your setting, frame by frame, without fear that you will under- or overexpose the other frames. Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, none is 400 ASA precisely. Both Kodak and Ilford are variable 100-800 ASA speed films, with a marketing peak of 400. One can shoot at any speed he likes better the grain, tone range, contrast, etc. - 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: Filter Blab
Now I know why my email's In bin isn't full of willing buyers for my B+W MC 77mm 010 filter! But seriously, Shel, yours is the first letter to directly compare SMC filters with B+W RMC filters. I still have five lenses for which I must buy protective -010 filters, so I'll follow your tip and get SMCs. Actually, when I look at my B+W RMCs, I likewise think, No glass! If the Pentax is even better, it must be truly amazing. Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've tried 'em all - top of the line Hoyas with their super coating, multi-coated B+Ws, and even a Heliopan. Nothing compares to the SMC Pentax Unfortunately, I'm stuck with multi-coated B+W filters for those lenses. Only a few months ago I could not imagine ever saying that I was stuck with a B+W MC filter. - 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: Filter Blab
Shel, For the record: What the Heliopan that you tried the special-order, multicoated version? - 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 .
Bird prints (was: Hello Pentaxians)
You might try the Audubon Society at http://www.audobon.org. Christopher Lillja [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm a school publications guy and I need some help finding a good shot of a red-tailed hawk. I need an original 8x10 print or larger to blow up to poster size. The photographer can retain all rights, but I'd like to get rights in a deal to do a short run poster and use the photo in our school publications. Any suggestions? I have moderate budget to play with on 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: Chromogenic BW Film
While I haven't shot chromogenic BW since 1987, I distinctly remember more than one review citing the frame-by-frame flexibility, at least for Ilford XP-1. I can't recall what happens to the +2 or -2 ISO frames; they werern't rendered less usable, just different. I don't believe it was about grain.Contrast, perhaps? What do the chromogenic filmmakers' websites say? Is this claim currently being made? Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Subject: Re: Chromogenic BW Film [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Indeed, a key attribute of these films is that you need not commit the entire roll to one ISO setting. Rather, you can choose your setting, frame by frame, without fear that you will under- or overexpose the other frames. That doesn't sound right, and is counter to my experience. Some time ago I did what I called a typical consumer shoot and used three different rolls of C41 BW film. The idea was to shoot the rolls and just drop 'em off at the handiest lab I could find. One roll - perhaps Ilford - was shot using variable EIs and the results were all over the place. They were terrible. I can see shooting an entire roll at one EI, 200, 400, 800, and getting consistent results, but not shooting as you've suggested. - 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: B+W 77mm MRC UV-010 multicoated UV filter, $50
This is the multicoated version (Mfg Catalog # 66070252, list price $158.00; BH Catalog # BWUVMC77, BH price: $77), not the single-coated version (Mfg Catalog # 65070156, BH Catalog # BWUV77) that BH sells for $46.25. The rim says MRC for Multi-Resistant Coating. I bought the filter after ordering a 300/4M lens. The lens turned out to be a 300/4 SMC, which I returned. The filter is in the box, unused. Will ship within the U.S. only, for $50 plus insured U.S. mail. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: FA31/1.8 AL Limited Specifications
Well, the 31/1.8 will be competing with Sigma's new 28/1.8 aspherical with floating elements, at about one-fourth the price. Purchasing the Sigma will be far easier to justify (or explain after the fact) to our wives. Paal Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, its an effective way of filling holes. This lens may appeal equally to those who want an 28/1.8 as those lusting for a 35/1.8. P$BiM(B - 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: FA31/1.8 AL Limited Specifications
Gerald Cermak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Trust me when I tell you that the current FA35/2 creates no lens envy by their owners - I have one. It deserves to inspire envy. The only reason it doesn't, I suppose, is that it's priced within reach of mortals. But the 28/2.8 just isn't bright enough for my liking, whereas the 31/1.8 is what I want at the wider end. That's where the older Pentax 28/2s come in, and Vivitar Series 1 28/1.9. Now, if they could also do a FA* 35/1.4, then maybe that would be something special. In your dictionary, look up Canon EOS--Stratospherically Priced Lenses AND Nikon pre-AI Affordable Lenses. - 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 .
Almost
I know how you feel, Donald. Last week, I set my sights on a Canon Canonet QL17 rangefinder. It was a GIII--the final, most sought-after model--and it was BLACK, a combination nearly impossible to find. Unaware of what he had, the seller mentioned neither fact in his title. Having tipped my gotta have it hand a few minutes too soon the preceding Sunday, I waited till the final minute to begin to place my first bid, only to watch in horror as the screen took forever to let me confirm. By the time I did, time had run out. The camera went for $89.50--about the same as its dime-a-dozen silver stablemate. And who won it? The same guy who had outsniped me that Sunday. Donald Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The difference was 30 seconds. I was bidding from work and it took forever to refresh from my last successful bid. - 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 .
Opinion sought on a $175,000 asking price
I sent the URL to my friend, an avid collector of vintage European cameras and EBay addict. Here is what he had to say: I saw it yesterday. There is another one at 1.7 million and has bunch of crap in it. At least this one has a bunch of Leicas. http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1238255712 - 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 .
Autoloaded to frame 1
Fuji pioneered the advance to the final frame concept in its point-and-shoots, I believe in the early 80s. Some pro-level SLRs (Contax, possibly others) now let you choose whether the frame counter should count up or count down, roll by roll. I agree with Ayesh: Keeping the exposed images safely protected makes so much sense, camera makers whose cameras don't offer the feature--at least as a choice--have some explaining to do. One can only imagine what priceless photos the world has lost because a camera back was prematurely opened. -- Ayash Kanto Mukherjee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A month back, Canon EOS 300 came in my hand and I noticed that it advanced the film to the last frame with the closure of camera back. ... if the camera back is opened by accident, the exposed part goes inside the film cartridge and it is the unexposed part which gets spoiled. So, if you have taken a few shots with lot of hardwork and thinking, it remains safe inside the cartridge. - 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: Market segments (was Kodak dumbing down...)
That would be, Urng. petit miam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Urrnnngh. PS: I don't wish to touch off a dialog with any of our UK or down under members about how to spell analog, dialog, or gage (though I spelled them the American way just to spite 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 .
Re: Market segments (was Kodak dumbing down...)
Norman Baugher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think Isaac, that it's necessarily the dumbing down of photographers that everyone is bemoaning, it's more the dumbing down of people in general. --- The dashboards of some Audis, Fords, and other car makes no longer include an analog oil-pressure gage. Drivers of these cars, we are told, seldom look at the gauge. In place of the gage is an idiot light that, basically, tells you that you should have added oil a month ago. Yet these same cars feature a fuel gage AND a low fuee warning light that blinks as your fuel becomes dangerously low. Why can't the oil gage do the same? PS: I don't wish to touch off a dialog with any of our UK or down under members about how to spell analog, dialog, or gage (though I spelled them the American way just to spite 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 .
OT: What Kodak does... was: Nasty Kodak rumor
Mark Dalal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But since Porta and Supra are still packaged with films speeds on them and lack the when to use this film graphics on the box, I've got no gripe. Well, I'VE got a gripe: Kodak's pro films come packed directly in a plastic cylinder; There is no cardboard to slip under my camera's film reminder slot. I'm not saying Kodak should pack the cylinder in a cardboard box. But it would be nice if the cylinder also contained an insert to slip onto the back of our cameras. - 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: Mag Lites
Pelican Products' URL is http://www.pelican.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: M series Film Transport Problems
Ayash Kanto Mukherjee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What happened was that the teeth of the spindle on which the film runs, slipped quite often. As a result, it ended with superposed exposure between adjacent frames. I had this problem several times a year with my Minox 35 GT, Minox 35 ML, and Olympus XA. Each advanced the film by means of a single sprocket. After those cameras, I decided that any future camera must have two sprockets. - 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: Rubber Eyecup: My stupid, costly mistake
Believe me, Rob, I folded the rubber flange back as far as I could, with all my force, but that Ricoh eyecup has one deep flange. Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Subject: On 8 May 2001, at 12:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So please, people: if your eyecup is removable, remove it each time you open or close your camera. Or just learn to hold it up and out of the way as you swing the back closed, if you have an Eye-cup fitted to the Pentax 67 you quickly learn that this action is a necessity. - 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 Do You Carry
Well, I finally settled on my go-everywhere SLR/lens, and it's not an SLR, but a rangefinder, as one or two of you had suggested, only to have me brush off your suggestion. I bow in abject apology. On my belt, wherever I go, I wear a black Eagle Creek belt pouch. In the pouch, I carry a Yashica Electro GX rangefinder (40/1.7) with ISO 400 or 800 film; no flash. Attached to the Yashica is a narrow Domke rubberized neck strap. Narrow, so it can double as a wriststrap. Attached to the neck strap by elastic straps are two canisters. One holds a sheet of microfiber cloth; the other, a spare roll of color print film (ASA 400 or 800). In another pocket of the pouch I carry a lens brush and a spare lens cap. That's it. I'll probably add a light table tripod, stored in the pouch. - 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: Nasty Kodak rumor, or the sloppy truth: the dumbing down of NorthAmerica??
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You must moonlight as a Ritz Camera salesperson. I had the opposite problem when buying film recently at Ritz: a salesman second-guessing my informed choice: Me: Do you have any of the new Fujicolor 1600, the version that uses the fourh color layer? Salesman: May I ask why you want to use 1600? Me: I'm shooting a school play in available light, with a 200mm f/3 lens. Salesman: Oh. OK. I can appreciate that he wanted to make sure I wasn't an ignoramus who was thinking, If 800 is better than 400, 1600 must be better than 800. But he also had an agenda: He was an intelligent young man who was studying photography, and nearly all his shots, I learned, were scenics, his camera mounted a tripod. Photographers whose subject matter is exclusively inanimate objects or studio stills sometimes forget that other photographers shoot moving objects under less-than-ideal conditions. We don't always tote a tripod. We may never enlarge beyond 4R (4 by 6 inches). We will gladly trade fine grain and high resolving power to capture our subjects at a shutter speed faster than 1/15 second. By the way, Ritz had the new Fuji...and my pro dealer still doesn't. I haven't developed the prints 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 .
Super Program LCD display question
In all three of my Super Programs, the viewfinder often shows a different shutter speed than the LCD on the top panel. The difference is usually just one f/stop, but it's unsettling. Which readout should I trust? - 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 Owner
Just for spite, I'd march in there with a 54mm lens on a Pentax 110 (if there were such a lens). Mike Steele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...the NHL prohibits long lenses (apparently so does Major League Baseball). I went taking my Pentax Spotmatic and a 55mm Takumar lens and they still didn't want to let me in...saying nothing longer than 54mm!!! - 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: Camera inspections at airport security
Why do the airport security guards insist on peering through the viewfinder of a non-SLR camera? What do they think they're gonna see? - 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 .
Rubber Eyecup: My stupid, costly mistake
I had recently installed a large Ricoh rubber eyecup onto my Super Program. Each time I opened or closed the camera's hinged back, the eyecup got in the way. But by struggling I always managed to force the camera's back past the rubber. When I attempted to rewind the most recent roll of film, the rewind lever wouldn't turn; something was binding. Hmmm; this would frequently occur if the ME II winder was in place, or a Bgoen quick release. But this camera had neither. I pressed the release button again, and again. Still the film wouldn't rewind. Then I saw why: In wrestling the back past the rubber eyecup, I had closed it properly. It was skewed 5 or 10 degrees off-axis. I feared that I had ruined the camera's hinges--and worse, that I had ruined the entire roll of film. My camera dealer lifted up the rewind lever and the back popped open. He immediately closed it. He assured me that the one-second open-and-shut action may have cost two or three exposures, but predicted that the foam had protected the film over the entire time that the door had been misaligned. Well, it hadn't. Not a single frame bore even the faintest image. Here's the shame of it: Each workday, I ride with my car across the Potomac River on a ferrry. A few days earlier, a 19-year-old who had recently begun to work on the ferrry died, together with his fiancee, in a fiery car accident. The ferry captain asked everyone to place flowers on the ferry throughout the week. Other flowers would be placed by coworkers at the base of the dock's flagpole, which flew at half-mast. I assured the captionI would take memorable photos. The flowers on the boat presented a supreme irony, because all were placed on six-foot-long boxes--coffins?--that held life preservers. Using my 24mm lens, I took several shots of one box where flowers had been placed above the words Adult Life Jackets and Children's Life Jackets...just beside a fire extinguisher. So please, people: if your eyecup is removable, remove it each time you open or close your camera. - 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 .
Recording expousre data (was: Subject: Re: PUG request)
The Contax SLR databack lets you reserve the front two frames for imprinting exposure data of the remaining frames--frame number, aperture, shutter speed, ASA setting (I think), over/underexposure, and day/date/time. The imprinting is made at the end of the rewind. Cool and useful. - 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 .
Why wives can't trust their cheatin' husbands
Scene from work, this morning; my friend's name has been changed to protect the guilty: Alfredo: Paul, I must made a big mistake and I need your help. Paul: Uh-oh. Did you break something? Alfredo: Not exactly. I just submitted a winning bid on EBay for $375. But the seller is in Australia, and he accepts only BidPay. Trouble is, a BidPay purchase will show up at home on my credit card, and I don't want my wife to know. Can you pay for me and I'll write you a check immediately? Paul: Sure, but I don't belong to BidPay. Alfredo: No problem. We'll sign you up right away. Paul: OK. But that means that the next time I want a camera or a lens from that British dealer that will ship to home addresses only (if you're outside the UK), I can have them ship it to your home. Alfredo: Deal. Paul: I'll be right there. - 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 Pentax 105mm f/2.8
$200 is not high for a lens that shows up so seldom. I paid $200 for mine, from Finland; the only other specimen I've found, other than on EBay, was $171 from Sweden. Jose Rodriguez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...the local Pro Shop currently has one in Exc+ Condition ($200), if anybody is interested. The price is on the high side, but this is an outstanding short telephoto lens. http://www.precision-camera.com/buy/usedpentax.htm - 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 135/2.5K prices (was Re: OT: Stuff @ Midwest)
Chris asked: How much do those usually go for? I've been thinking of selling mine. Chris, Daphne, Here are the SMC 135/2.5K prices I've noted; if the condition is not stated, if did not appear in the listing. I stopped tracking the 135K's prices a few months ago because I had gathered so many URLs that between my bookmarks and EBay, there always seemed to be a few for sale. 2000: $155 EX, KEH 8/2000 $119 BNG, KEH 8/2000 $80 LN-, kamerakorner.com (assumed to be SMC; doesn$B!G(Bt mention Takumar, whereas other listings did), 7/18/2000 $120 (180 Cdn) 8+ Henry$B!G(Bs, Aug. 17 2000 1999: $60 bargain and $100in better shape, (beat up$B!I(B), Cameratradersinc. (Colorado), August $99 BH (9); called it an M (Takumar?), June $99 with hood and case (9, recent CLA), Ritz Collectibles, (800) 956-9132, Sept.(The first I had found; I bought it--Paul) $135 Genesis (before July) $150 lecamera.com (before July) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
24mm/2.8 suggestions
Ramesh, Pentax SMC coating is a definite asset in a wide angle. The Sigma Super Wide II 24/2.8 has many fans. They praise the resolution and contrast while cautioning about the Sigma's cheaper construction and less-than-ideal flare control. It tied with Canon for first place on On Olle Bjernulf$B!G(Bs website comparing lenses. And it outscored the Pentax 24/2F and Tamron 24/2.5 in Photodo's MTF measurements. But we won't get into that. The Pentax 24/2.8A and K lenses have an almost religious following for their outstanding contrast, color, and resolution. If you can live without the "A" setting, for $30 to $50 more than a new Sigma I'd urge you to seek out a used Pentax SMC 24/2.8K. I'm partial to this choice, having voted it my favorite lens. For a sound choice below $100 U.S., consider a used Vivitar 24/2.8 (52mm filter). Introduced in the 1980s, it's available in PKA mount. The multicoated lens uses is 7 elements in 7 groups and can focus as close as 190 mm (7.5 in.) for a 1:5 magnification. It measures 64mm long and 41 mm in diameter. Weight, according to Photodo, is 190 g--a few grams less than the Pentax 24/2.8K, but less than the 24/2.8A or the Sigma. Is the Vivitar still available new? Boz Dimitrov wrote in 1997: "If [you will not be using] the 24mm very seriously, people tell me the Vivitar 24mm 2.8 is quite good, especially for the money." Another list member, Kelvin, had this to say: "I just got back my first results from my Vivitar 24/2.8 and must say I'm pleased with it It$B!G(Bs a good lens. It$B!G(Bs quite sharp when stopped down. Haven$B!G(Bt used it wide open." Ramesh Kumar_C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am planning to get 24mm lens. I would like it take 52mm filters since I already have couple of 52mm filters. ... There is Sigma 24mm/2.8 and is around 190USD. - 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 .
Favorite camera among all brands and types (a voting site)
See My favourite camera of all time!!! at http://www.freevote.com/booth/fav_camera - 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 .
Fast, Clean Glass* (200/2.8A*, 300/4A*, 300/2.8A*) at Ritz Camera online
These prices are not far out of line when you consider their condition. Here are the prices I've gathered, and I try to record all sightings of such scarce, desirable lenses: 200/2.8A*: $699 Min-, Woodmere, 16NOV00 $895 Cambridge (May 99) 300/4A*: $537 Henrys.com, 8 and 8+ (two), 7/3/00 $449.00 (two), Bargain KEH, OCt 2000 $839 EX+ Camera TradersLtd. 08NOV00 $599 Ex++, Camera Traders $750 with box, shade, newsgroup, mint, 6/98 $525 (two) and $695, KEH, NOv. 2000 $579 Mint- Cameta Camera 9 July 99 300/2.8A*: $2,295.00 (Condition 8) 18March 2001, store not recorded, but I think it was KH $2900 Mint-, Genesis (1999) $4000 lecamera (1999) Some lenses and cameras require so many hours to find that if you wait for the right price, you'll miss your chance. Case in point: Monday morning, I bought a black Yashica Electro GX rangefinder (40/1.7 lens, made 1975-1980) on EBay for $264. What is its market value? Hard to say: Not one of my 200+ URLs all over the world had an Electro GX for sale; Stephen Gandy, the classic camera afficianado behind http://cameraquest.com had never seen one, even in chrome; nor had the man behind http://www.yashica-guy.com. I wanted it, and it just wouldn't have made sense to hesitate. I chose to be an hour late to work so I could snipe it at 8:50 am Eastern Time, while California slept. You can see my winning bid at http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=1230637582. You can read about the Electro GX at http://cameraquest.com/yash35gx.htm. Paal Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone who buys these lenses at those prices must be pretty nuts...Or maybe I'm nuts who sell my lenses cheaply... :-) Avoid EBA syndrome (EBay Anxiety); I spotted these over the weekend at http://www.ritzcam.com/catalog/index.html Pentax, 200mm f2.8 SMC A* ED (green star) w/built-in hood, both caps #5696xxx (10-) $795 Pentax, 300mm f4.0 SMC A* ED (green star) w/built-in hood, both caps #5304xxx (10-) $695 Pentax, 300mm f2.8 SMC A* EDIF w/caps, in metal case.Awesome Lens! #5685xxx (9++) $2,750 Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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: Or Best Offer: a misleading--and dishonest--phrase
Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is hypocritical. If you are going to argue on ethical grounds that it's unfair to extend the auction (even though the seller has that right), then you have to admit that it's also unfair for the buyer to try and force the seller to sell it for significantly less than it's worth. Chris, I don't follow the logic here. I would be forcing him to sell it at a lowball price only if he stipulated a time limit. If he said, OBO by the end of 30 April, you bet I'd force him to comply with his promise. In other words, you're saying that it's ethically okay to screw the seller because you want to read OBO literally, but it's not ethically okay for the seller to read OBO literally and delay the sale until they receive a fair bid. If I'm saying that, it's news to me. As I wrote earlier, I don't lowball. Even if someone is out of work, I would not take advantage of his desperation. I almost invariably cite a cross section of recent prices. Rob Studdert can attest that I sent him a list of recent prices for a 28/2A so that he would set an adequately high reserve when he posted the lens on EBay. (As it was, he was well aware of its value.) I simply can't follow the second part of your sentence, the clause about reading OBO literally. Since no temporality is implied in OBO, there is no time limit to extend. American list members over forty may recall the 1970s new-car dealer who said, on a television commercial, You can drive away with this car for just 3,500 bananas. One customer drove up with 3,500 bananas and insisted on getting the car. The dealer refused. The court supported the buyer. Would I do such a thing? Never. Do I regard that buyer as a scumbag for taking advantage of the word bananas when he knew in his heart that the dealer meant dollars? You bet. Chris, as I wrote in the passage you quoted in another posting, I have come to understand from you and others that no deception is intended by OBO. It is not unethical. It is frustrating and, to the literalists among us, misleading. - 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: Goodbye Kodachrome 25?
Antti-Pekka, While I applaud your vivid subject line, my choice would be Mama Don't Take My Kodachrome Away. --Paul - 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 winning bids: I'll PDF yours
I use Adobe Acrobat PDF every day. If anyone on the list would like to archive their winning EBay bid in Acrobat, email me the URL and I'll send you back the PDF file. Let me know how my browser should size the fonts before PDFing: Small, Medium, Large, or in-between). Also let me know if you want me to delete the final page if it has nothing but Terms and conditions and such. Unless you tell me otherwise, I will assume that North Americans prefer letter paper size (8.5 x 11 inches) while everyone else prefers A4. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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: Mercury Cell for older camera
Daphne, I used a Minox 35 GT and a Minox 35 ML as my main cameras for nine years. Damn, they were quiet--no louder than a Leica M6, perhaps quieter. It was wonderful to see the GT's needle rise and fall as I panned the lens. But it was frustrating to underexpos shots because of the GT's whole-area metering. A bright scene would turn a 1/30-second exposure into a 1/125- or 1/250-second exposure. So caveat photographer: If the exposure brevity seems too good to be true, it probably is. I had the same problem in my Olympus XA until I learned to turn the camera over, press my finger against the ISO dial, and dial in another couple EVs. The 35 ML (circa 1985?) introduced five improvements to the classic Minox exposure system: 1. Full-area metering was replaced by 60/40 center-weighted metering. 2. The GT's CdS (cadmium-sulfide) meter was replaced by a more accurate silicon diode. 3. Exposure hold was added (by half-depressing the shutter release). 4. A convenient +1 compensation switch was provided. 5. The 25-800 ISO scale was extended to ISO 1600. But the ML also did away with the G-series' galvanometric needle. Now you had a column of LEDs. While unquestionably more reliable, the LEDs introduced three inconveniences: 1. You could you not see your exposure change continuously. 2. You had to partially depress the shutter to activate the metering. 3. You would not know if your exposure had changed unless you removed your finger from the shutter button and partially depressed it again. The GT continued to be made, and in the late 80s Minox introduced its successor, the GTE. It adopted the ML's aforementioned improvements but retained the GT's retro needle-driven readout! The Minotar lens was redesigned for sharpness and shorter close focus. This arrangement has been carried over to the GTX and other models in the needle-driven GT series. Exposure challenges notwithstanding, you'll be more than satisfied with the sharpness of the Tessar-design 35/2.8 lens. Let us know if you find yourself taking photos you would have otherwise missed. I did. That's why I just bought a Yashica rangefinder. - 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: Or Best Offer: a misleading--and dishonest--phrase
Yes: If he doesn't like the best offer, the seller can refuse to sell. That's precisely my point, Chris: It's a hollow promise. Heck, if he doesn't want to accept my $100 offer, he can sell it to his brother for $110, then buy it right back. That's one facet of what shilling is about, and it's wrong. My first choice would be: Best offer above $400 received by 2001 April 30. or First offer above $400 get it. Either phrasing guarantees that the seller receives an amount he can live with. Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And the trouble with nitpicking unconditional statements is that it can be done back to you, too. If the seller says $500 OBO and you have the highest offer at, say, $100, then it's not likely they'll want to sell it for that. If you try and claim that OBO means that they should accept any offer because OBO is unconditional, then they can come right back and say that they didn't specify a time frame for the sale. Because they didn't specify this condition, they can take as long to sell it as they want. chris Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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: Or Best Offer: a misleading--and dishonest--phrase
I'm glad you noted the smiley, Mark. For the record: In language theory, there are two kinds of OR: 1. exclusive, or alternative: Do you prefer Nikon cameras or Pentax? Shall I torture you, or will you reveal the code? Coffee, tea, or milk? 2. includive, or Boolean: Find every web page that has Nikon OR junk. So instructed, a highly Boolean search engine such as Alta Vista will will return three kinds of pages: a. Nikon cameras are swell.(only Nikon) b. Junk in, junk out. (only junk or its case variants) c. Nikon cameras are junk. (both character strings permitted). If you wanted ONLY Nikon, or ONLY junk, you would have to instruct Alta Vista to search for Nikon AND NOT junk. This particular example, however, could pose a problem: I'm not sure how well Alta Vista handles oxymorons. Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But then I also realized that most of these statements say something like $500.00 *or* best offer. Because that OR is in there they can always turn the best offer they receive and opt to hold out for the $500! ;-) (note smiley Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 .
Subject: RE: Or Best Offer: a misleading--and dishonest--phrase
Private sales don't have rules? The more's the pity. Time was, a handshake was binding, and an oral agreement was not dismissed for want of a piece of paper. My teenage son in Israel has spent the past year studying the Talmudic tractate that deals with personal business agreements: I agree to do this or that for you, on the condition that you pay me such-and-such in return. Or: I agree to lend this tool to you, and you agree to take good care of it. While some of the legal analysis and debate hinges on written contracts, by far the greater share deals with implied or spoken agreements and implicit responsibility: 1. I lend you an axe, and while you use it the head comes off. Who is responsible? 2. I agree to watch your sheep while you are away, but I do it as a favor (for free); if a wolf kills one of your sheep, must I remunerate you? 3. I say I returned the money (or tool) that you lent me; you say I didn't. On whom lies the burden of proof? I am not suggesting that the conclusions adduced by the Talmud are the right conclusions for all societies and economies. But say what you will about being overly legalistic: The alternative--no rule of law--may be worse. -- Leonard Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Auctions have rules. Private sales don't. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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: Or Best Offer: a misleading--and dishonest--phrase
In the 1980s, here in the United States, a man placed his Mercedes-Benz for sale. An attractive woman was interested, and they struck an unusual deal: If she agreed to sleep with him 100 times, the Mercedes would be hers. Perhaps she felt ashamed, perhaps he was no Don Juan, but it wasn't long before she regretted her decision. After about the 15th round. she asked to back out of the deal, offering to return the Benz, with compensation. But the seller refused, insisting that their deal was binding. Their written agreementhad not not provided for this exigency. So the matter went to court. As I recall, the state ruled as follows: Since her service was not a legal activity, theirs was not a legal agreement. Tiger Moses [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Remember, money isn't always involved. Say a guy has a motor cycle for sale $800 or OBO you come by and show him a laptop you'll trade for the motorcycle, and he say ok I've know people who have traded computer for used cars! Paul Franklin Stregevsky - 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 24/2.8K (10-), $225 U.S.
For my fellow SMC devotees who want old glass in nice condition: 13478 - Pentax lens: K mount 24 SMC/2.8 10- $225 w/case http://www.prodevlab.com/body.html - 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 .
Fast, Clean Glass* (200/2.8A*, 300/4A*, 300/2.8A*) at Ritz Camera online
Avoid EBA syndrome (EBay Anxiety); I spotted these over the weekend at http://www.ritzcam.com/catalog/index.html Pentax, 200mm f2.8 SMC A* ED (green star) w/built-in hood, both caps #5696xxx (10-) $795 Pentax, 300mm f4.0 SMC A* ED (green star) w/built-in hood, both caps #5304xxx (10-) $695 Pentax, 300mm f2.8 SMC A* EDIF w/caps, in metal case.Awesome Lens! #5685xxx (9++) $2,750 - 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 .
