mark_crown4

Sorry - here I am again - the 'well know website' is eBay - the 35mm 3.5 I got off there is in lovely condition and just works. Camera Porn - when I have the time - honest - but I just don't scan 35mm - never got around to that. One day.................

Hi Sorry - I popped back and did not get a response at first so I just left it at that but thank you all for responding. I'm selling the 1.7 50mm M it came with and have got an 50mm 1.4 'A' which is a lens I love and have had before - it's a light gatherer extraordinaire that lens and really nice to use. And yes, the K 3.5 35mm - I bought a lovely example from France and I am getting used to that and seeing the use of 35mm FL as a challenge (I nearly got the 3.5 28mm K too but I have 28mm in the Nikon range (an Ai F2) but do not have a 35mm Nikkor). So, I'm sticking with that two lens set up for now. But the KX - the 'King of PentaX - in my humble opinion - and a wonderful camera to have around your neck. Thanks.

Hi Pentax fans - I'd appreciate your suggestions. 'Just bought a wonderful Pentax KX off the well-known website - in extremely good condition (including a very clear viewfinder) with new light seals and 50 mm M 1.7 SMC lens. What a camera! I've put some 400TX in it for a try out. I had one a number of years ago but let it go - I used it with A 50mm 1.4. I got some superb photos. I made a big mistake then. So, what other lenses might I consider for this beauty (I love my two Nikons - an FM3a and an FM2n but I had to have a KX again)? The 'clack' it makes when you fire the shutter is just brilliant. Just getting my head around the match needle metering. And it's so easy to focus even off the centre of the viewfinder. In the past I've had Pentaxes - the MX (very slow to operate and over-rated in my view), the ME Super (extremely portable but my big hands did not take to it) and an MZ5n (a superb little camera in my view - its metering was better than anything from Nikon when it first came out). But the KX left the biggest impression on me in terms of build quality and performance. They don't make 'em like this anymore. So what do you reckon - another 1.4 lens? A 1.2 50mm? Or short telephoto (if so which?). And what wide angle would you suggest? Thank you in anticipation.

Thank you Rodeo Joe - I will investigate!

I've had 3 iterations of the 24mm 2.8. An Ai, AF and AIS. The Ai was very sharp but suffered from terrible ghosting as did the AF which was also sharp and where the ghosting was even worse. The AIS has proven to be the best for me - it does not like the sun being in the frame but tolerates it better than the other two. I have always used hyperfocal focussing on my 24mm lenses, so I've always got very sharp pictures back. However, I also have an Ai 28mm f2 which is actually sharper in the corners than the 24mm in my view on film. I also have the 20mm f3.5 which again I seldom use at anything bigger that f8. It is really good in the sun. Mind you, one of the best '24mm lenses' I have is my Nikkor 25-50 zoom. It is bulky and you have to watch out for vignetting with filters, again I use it at nothing less than f8 but the pictorial quality is very high indeed. All of these comments relate to film BTW.

I'm an FM2N and FM3A user. I may get a Nikon F3 again one day - I haven't got a bad word to say about one in the context of my photography. I really appreciate the newer focussing screens on the smaller F s as my eyesight continues to go down hill. But if I had the money - well I'd plumb for an F6 to be honest.

I have to say I would really like one of these (this and 16mm 3.5 fisheye). I have the 55 micro 2.8 version, plus the 50mm 1.4 AIS (which in my view is an excellent sample) and a Japanese 'pancake' 50 mm 1.8 (close focussing) which again I would say is very sharp indeed. I've experimented with both 50mm on an extension ring and had some very useable results. Websites showing pictures using the 1.2 testify to how it can be used artistically. Yep - I'm sorely tempted - especially by the later 9 bladed iris version.

"The FM3a is much more solid, but it is more complicated than the common FM2/FE2, and was engineered well into the plastic-fantastic AF era as a throwback retro manual-focus halo model" I bought the FM3a because I thought it would keep going - well it did, for 15 years as Shun pointed out - time has flown as usual. I'm sure I read somewhere that the shutter was based on AF model so you may be right Orsetto. I bought it to use it and I have, the metering is accurate and its not even a spot meter and the thing is I can still see so clearly when something is in focus or not when I composing a picture. I picked up the black FM2N off eBay for £105.00 - the best £105.00 I have ever spent. She's brassing nicely. I do love the manual camera picture taking process. I love the FM3a - its an indulgence but maybe, maybe I'd have been better getting an FM2N instead first off? I have to say though, the F3 is still a very desirable camera. Ooooopps - don't go there Mark!!!

Hi All I did get the FM3a fixed in the end and it cost me £270.00 (ouch!) at Nikon in Richmond, London UK. last year. It took ages because they had to replace the shutter unit and had to wait for one to come in from Japan, but they also CLA' d her too. When I got her back I sulked for a bit and let her know that I was far from happy by putting her in a cupboard and making sure she saw me taking the FM2N out instead. Since then I've managed to put 3 rolls of E6 through her and she's back on top form. The FM2N is on mono duty and continues to keep going. BTW - given the previous discussions, I'm going to use the FM3a as much as possible this time especially in finishing off my last colour stock. Now a Frenchman has contacted me with the same problem as mine had. I wonder if the FM3a has a reputation for failure - I would be interested to find out.

You are using the lens correctly then - keeping highlights out of the background because they produce ugly bokeh but I can tell you that the Pentax FA 50mm 1.4 can do exactly the same for a lot less outlay.

I too was a big fan of Plus-X, its tonality was old school but also love FP4. These days I use FP4 or Tri-X and agree that if the latter is developed properly, grain is not a problem - great detail and tonal gradation inside or outdoors. The problem with Tri-X in the UK for me is finding the 24 exposure version. I also agree that XP2 is an extremely good emulsion. Having said that, I have just loaded some AGFA APX100 to my camera and I am looking forward to the results. I have just finished a roll of Kosmo Photo 100 that I bought from a film only camera shop in Berlin. HP5 - I just do not get on with it. But for taking documentary photos of the family over the years Tri-X rules for me. However, XP2 beckons in the long run. Also have a roll of both Deltas to try. Acros - too expensive now. Some beautiful photos here BTW.

Well, may I join Orsetto in hoping that you enjoy the FE2 - and its great to see a post talking about analogue photography so passionately.

I had an F3 once - with a standard prism - I agree with you that it is still a hell of a camera and I wish I still had mine. As for your comment about dioptres - I think that the best advice we can give anyone is to try the camera and see how they get on with what it is fitted with - dioptres, screens etc. I can only tell people what I have seen from actually using these models and what works best for me - which I have made clear. My eyesight is changing as I get older, and I when I work with macro or telephoto lenses the brighter screens are a real big help to nail focus.

For the record, I'm not saying that you cannot take pictures with the FM or FE because of their dimmer focussing screens - I just happened to find it way easier to focus on the FM2N/FM3A - very quick when isolating the subject matter. I have an FE - a lovely camera, now retired because of a fault - the screen is definitely dimmer especially with longer lenses. Way back in the day when I had the chance to buy an FM I compared it to an old Pentax KX at the shop and even the KX screen was better for me than the FM and I bought the KX. Focussing on it was a breeze and I wish I still had it - the KX was/is a lovely camera too. The M series that followed were not for me! The MX is over-rated and not a patch on the FM/FM2/FM2n. Try moving the shutter speed dial quickly on an MX when taking a shot and compare it to that on an FM/FM2. Also do not underestimate technical improvements since the FM/FE. I have 3 modern FM type screens and I maintain that you will focus much more easily with a brighter screen than a duller one. A prospective buyer needs to know this, dependent on his or her eyesight and that is worth pointing out. BTW - the Englishman falling on his ass (arse?) - is that my Prime Minister , Boris Johnson by any chance? Because it sums him up a treat if it is! I just wish that the ass was Covid-19. Sadly, it seems to be the British public who is breaking the fall of the bumbling fool that he is.

I will emphasis again that if you use FM3a screens in an FM2N you'll have no trouble focussing unless there is something you have not told us about your eyesight. I mostly shoot hyper-focally when using my FM3a/FM2N and I have lots of very accurately focussed macro shots too.