mark_freburg

<p>Ha ha ha!</p>

<p>Jos, Spencer, thank-you. The LensPen is cheap enough it seems worth having for that inevitable occasion when something does get on the lens inadvertently.</p> <p>Jos--that video explained the SensorKlear product well enough but was still terrible. The narrator was not very professional, was she?</p>

<p>Thanks Stephen. I <em>don't</em> routinely clean my lenses. I don't touch them unless I see something on them, and I can't get it off with the brush. Basically last option. But I like being prepared. The old Boy Scout tendency I guess. I also keep clear filters on my lenses, a carryover from the old days. I've been told this is completely unnecessary, too. Again, avoidance through pre-planning? Thoughts?</p>

<p> https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71XNik67NKL._SL1299_.jpg <BR>I am out of the loop in many ways, and was not aware of the "LensPen" until recently. It looks like a handy tool, beter than carrying a lens cloth and liquid lens cleaner.</p> <ul> <li>Do you recommend the LensPen?</li> <li>How long do they last?</li> <li>Why are there different kinds, and why do I need them? (See photo of kit, below...er, <em>above</em>...apparently.)</li> </ul> <p>Thank-you!<br /> --Mark</p>

<p>Ha ha ha ha ha!!</p>

<p>Douglas, I'm also a member of the Pentax Forum. I've looked at the sale section. I will consider that option as it doesn't have the fees that eBay has, as you mention. Thank-you!</p>

<p>Hector, thanks for the additional info on KEH.com!</p> <p>To the guys commenting on "mint." I should not have used the word. I have been collecting guns for decades and it's the same way in that world. I made the mistake of speaking casually as one might while sitting around the kitchen table speaking to friends, as opposed to speaking across the sales table to a buyer or seller. I clearly understand the difference and apologize in case I mislead anyone who doesn't understand the specifics of such terms when used officially.</p>

<p>Jochen, your comments make sense, though I might take exception to "K-mount junk" only because what I have is in such excellent condition. If film wasn't such a hassle I could use this stuff until I die. That doesn't distract from your sensible suggestion, however. I guess I need at least a starting price, however, for several items.</p>

<p>Well, I actually might have the boxes for a couple that I bought new, but the rest no. Most of it is excellent to mint however. I have looked on eBay. I guess I need to do more of that for a longer stretch to see get a broader idea of averages. Thanks Spencer.<br> --Mark</p>

<p>Thanks folks. I should add I'm more interested in selling than buying. A also wonder what "KEH" is. I guess I should google it!</p>

<p>Is their a source--any kind, anywhere--some kind of guide as to going prices for older 1970s-1980s film cameras?<br> Thanks for any and all discussion, suggestions, or general blather on this topic!<br> --Mark</p>

<p>I really don't know anything about cameras. I have a half dozen Pentax classic film bodies and a bunch of lenses that kept me happy until the early 2000s when I finally went digital, also Pentax because of the lens compatibility of course. Got a high end Canon non-SLR. Don't know anything about other cameras. Would do some research and buy a really nice, small and handy rangefinder because before I got into SLRs I learned photography on a rangefinder, and I consider those real cameras. No focus, no internal meter--you make pictures with your brain. But maybe those <em>don't exist anymore?</em> They are all digital too, and of course have built-in meters...?</p> <p>I guess I'd like someone to build an SLR with the simplicity of a manual, match-needle camera like the Pentax K1000 except digital. No menus, no automatic nothing. Only shoots RAW images. That would use up my lottery winnings.....</p>

<p><strong>Beatrice</strong>, SMC M prime lens are EVERYWHERE, as well as aftermarket lenses, and you should be able to replace that lens inexpensively. I wouldn't bother with trying to fix it or having it fixed myself, unless you just enjoy that sort of thing for its own sake. <br> --Mark</p>

<p>I probably suck for saying this, but after doing a lot more research in the days since I last posted, I'm not going to do any of my own processing, and for now, due to the cost associated with buying film and having it processed, which seems to be about $25 per 36 exposures of C41 (at best), I'm going to hold off on using my film cameras. <strong>Walter Degroot</strong> mentioned he was happiest hen using match-pointer 35mm cameras, and darned if I didn't get a lot of real joy from them myself, so I'm not dumping them, at least not my favorites, but I have several hobbies to feed (which is nutty in and of itself), so that's the upshot of all this. I recently bought another modern lens and yesterday bought a second--gasp--digital SLR--I hope I can get out of here alive having said that, but darned if cost of a second used DSLR body versus the cost of just a few rolls of film plus processing didn't come up in the decision. Am I a traitor? I still love those old friends, especially the ones that are mostly mechanical....<br> Mark</p>

<p>I need to be clear about my interests (oh, by the way, I did specify in my original message that I do 35mm only). I really would like to use my old cameras because I love the simplicity of the manual cameras and the fact that they force one to be a photographer and not simply a computer using drone. Forgive me if that seems to harsh an assessment of modern electronic everything cameras. ;) When I used cameras in the old days I think I thought far more about all aspects of the shot. Today of course one thinks about the composition but it is too easy to let a digital camera "think" for itself when it comes to exposure--but of course perhaps I've become lazy. <br /><br />You all may think me not really a photographer of the caliber one should be based on that statement, but it is what it is. I would truly love to get these old cameras out again and use them, but I really don't want to do any of my own processing. (I am willing to scan negs/slides/prints using my current scanner.) To me, processing is a separate hobby from making photos. Consider it like the firearms hobby. I'm an avid target shooter. I happen to also load my own target ammunition, but I know lots of folks who don't want to have anything to do with loading their own target ammo, and will only buy it commercially. They enjoy shooting, but don't have the time or inclination to spend at the loading bench. I'm the same way with photography. If I really had the interest to do my own processing I would never have stopped doing it forty years ago. <br /><br />I sincerely appreciate all the advice regarding processing but after giving it some hard thought, I decided that wasn't the way I want to go. I'm going to look at the commercial processors out there and follow up the suggestions many of you made. Thanks again!</p>