The wonders with Pentax Auto 110 lenses

<p>I have been enjoying the tiny lenses with Pentax Auto 110. It is a shame that I can't use it on Pentax cameras other than the Pentax Q. These tiny lenses can be adapted to micro four thirds, Sony NEX, Pentax Q and perhaps others in the making<br /> <img src="http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6118/6390728107_bf259ba780_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="425" /></p>

<p>The 24mm is the smallest of the bunch and I don't have the original cap and a film canister cap is just right to cover it. Think of the size with a <strong>filter size in 25.5mm</strong>. Some recent pictures with Sony NEX 5N with various Auto 110 lenses</p>

<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7180/6974199321_88e4147dcf_b.jpg" alt="" width="700px" /><br /> with 24mm f/2.8</p>

<p><br /><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7208/6828091580_9c1f5f752c_b.jpg" alt="" width="700px" /><br /> with 24mm f/2.8<br /><br /> <img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7058/6833288872_fdb00a002b_b.jpg" alt="" width="700px" /><br /> with 24mm f/2.8<br /> <br /> <img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7195/6818415806_be7f8681cd_b.jpg" alt="" width="700px" /><br /> with 50mm f/2.8<br /> <br /> <br /><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7176/6962901905_57a89f071b_b.jpg" alt="" width="700px" /><br>

with 70mm f/2.8 </p>

<p> </p>

These just might be among the best images ever taken with these lenses, since the NEX's IQ

is way better than 110 film.

 

It appears from your shots that the lens covers the NEX's sensor... so that means it covers

m4/3, too. (Am I right?)

 

Thanks for giving me this idea. I have just one lens, but I'll check out m4/3 adapters.

<p>I talked to peter Naylor in perth who got<br>

a pentax 110 a few months ago<br>

he could not get any film<br>

I have not seen any for a few years<br>

where did you find it.?<br>

hard to enjoy a camere obviously<br>

working , if you cannot get any film.<br>

I see you have. ( freezer cache?)</p>

<p>The auto 110 lenses don't cover the NEX sensor completely. I do run into vignette on corners but they are subject to lighting conditions. Some vignette in the landscape orientation is quite uniform and natural looking while others in portrait orientation is not easy to accept in some sever vignette results. I will show some samples later on.</p>

<p>I have not used any M4/3 cameras but in my research, they do cover the M4/3 sensors and I see some positive discussions in M4/3 forum. But the one issue you need to know that all are shot wide open in f/2.8 and there is no iris diaphragm in the lens.</p>

<p>I am working on two iris diaphragms modification for my auto 110 lenses but so far I am not successful. Here is picture of my 14 blades iris diaphragm -- it is something that I need to brag about though I don't get it working with my auto 110 lenses.</p>

<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7188/6968043877_34d714e5d1_z.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p> </p>

<p>For 110 film in US, check <a href="http://www.frugalphotographer.com/cat110.htm">http://www.frugalphotographer.com/cat110.htm</a></p>

<p>I use it on a Sony NEX 5N and if I ever get into Olympus E-M5, those tiny lenses will be used and I will try to modify them with the iris diaphragm as they will likely work better in smaller sensor.<br>

<img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7069/6952647205_6a0d744091_m.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>A close up with 24mm f/2.8 with Sony NEX 5N<br /> <img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7194/6810964366_e78f2e5b41_b.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="1024" /></p>

<p>The auto 110 lenses are especially suited for b&w photos in Sony 5N. They do have severe vignette. I always have to frame my shots knowing in advance that the vignette happens in the lower 1/3 of the picture in landscape and about 1/3 to the right in portrait orientation. Again, there is no exact science as the vignette happens subject to lighting condition with my 5N</p>

<p>No cropping is done on this spring white flower shot, the vignette happens more naturally looking in the landscape orientation as it is still balanced on both sides. It is not the case in the portrait orientation.<br>

<img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7056/6966710899_339cf74351_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="425" /><br>

with 70mm f/2.8</p>

<p>In portrait orientation, it is harder to accept the vignette is more noticeable. I frame this shot knowing well in advance that I will have darker corners to the right. This usually happens in stronger lighting where my shutter max out in 1/4000 seconds in iso 100<br>

<img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7209/6966856333_17f1771b07_z.jpg" alt="" width="425" height="640" /><br>

with 70mm f/2.8</p>

<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7187/6967084541_66edc11557_z.jpg" alt="" width="425" height="640" /><br>

with 50mm f/2.8</p>

<p>Strangely, the vignette happens more often on the longer lenses in 50mm and 70mm. In the 18 mm pano and 24mm, I don't get as much.</p>

<p>Beautiful shots, Hin! Thanks for posting them. I am always inspired by your creativity, especially with unique and unusual equipment. :-)</p>

<p>sorry about that I assumed ( missing a few words) that they were taken with 110 film.</p>

<p>As always you bring the best out of any lens.</p>

<p>Great Idea, Hin! what adapter are you using? Keep us informed on your progress with the iris. I have a whole set of these lenses. It would be a gas to use them on a digital camera.</p>

<p>@Louis, I have tried two different adapters from two different vendors and both are similar. One common issue in the two adapters that they don't lock the lens securely in place and it makes the lens wiggle a bit while focusing. It can be annoying especially on the heavier metal lens barrel with the 70mm and 20-40mm zoom . When I find the time and method of un-doable modification, I will try to glue the adapter to the lens. </p>

<p>Here is a picture of the Fotasy PTX 110 adapter that I bought from RainbowImaging in either Ebay or Amazon store. And I have the 70mm mounted with the Soligor 1.7x TC in the picture<br>

<img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7028/6479709697_c950070bd9_z.jpg" alt="" width="425" height="640" /></p>

<p>The TC has an extra disc that actually stops the lens down to about f/8.0 -- rough guessing.<br>

<img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7169/6479639135_eafc3516fc_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="425" /></p>

<p>It is possibly the tiniest TC you can find. Unfortunately, the TC adds more wiggle to the lens when mounted on my NEX. I have since sold the TC already. If I have another chance to play with the setup, I will spend extra money to get an extra adapter and glue the TC permanently to an adapter as a viable alternative.</p>

<p>The auto 110 lens has its shortcomings and one won't be happy with its performance if one expects to use it as a regular lens. I learn to use them to its vantage points -- indoor, b&w exclusively for its film heritage, nighttime shooting, street shooting in smaller setup, extremely pocketable lens setup etc.</p>

<p>The sharpest of the 110 goes to the 50mm and 70mm. <br /> <img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7151/6464382631_db86cbbe68_z.jpg" alt="" /><br /> with 70mm f/2.8<br /> <br /><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7021/6464373961_5241d7b4ed_z.jpg" alt="" /><br /> with 70mm f/2.8</p>

<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7055/6821915300_645185c092_z.jpg" alt="" width="433" height="640" /><br /> with 70mm f/2.8<br /> <br /><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7038/6968037707_ec57f2a13c_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="640" /><br /> with 70mm f/2.8</p>

<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7067/6957049667_cb8f08df75_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="425" /><br /> with 24mm f/2.8</p>

<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7061/6952744919_7f77e3893d_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="425" /><br>

night panning with 24mm f/2.8</p>

<p>In portraits, I actually find the 50mm f/2.8 easier to shoot as the minimum focusing distance (MFD) on the 70mm is about 6 feet while the 50mm f/2.8 is about 3 feet. And DOF and longer MFD makes the 70mm harder to use</p>

<p>I was in college and working part time at General Photo & Supply in Boston when the Pentax Auto 110 came out. I went to a Pentax dinner with the owner of the store. There were custom 11X14 prints made from 110 Kodachrome slides. Thr prints were quite good. I found that processing or the lack of quality processing, was the limiting factor for the 110m format. When I was younger I made enlargements from Minolta 16 negatives. The lens on the Minolta 16PS is very sharp. My favorite 110 lens may be the 26/2.7 Ektar from the Trimlite 48. As the film became better you could do more with the small format. </p>

<p>In the late '70s and early '80s, my mother shot a lot of Kodachrome on some kind of high-end 110 camera... can't remember if it was a Pentax or something else, but the slides are gorgeous and look fantastic when projected or printed. I've even scanned a few of them, with great results, although I don't have any of those scans handy to post at the moment.</p>

<p>Hin, I find it very strange that the vignetting is asymmetric; it's as if the lens were not mounted on the center of the sensor but rather off to one side. Does this happen to everyone who shoots Auto 110 lenses on NEX bodies?</p>

<p>@Mis, it is very odd. I do talk to another NEX user who have similar asymmetric vignette but mine tends to be more severe especially in the portrait orientation.</p>

<p>Hin, something else that seemed strange to me. In one of your followup comments, you write:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>In portrait orientation, it is harder to accept the vignette is more noticeable. I frame this shot knowing well in advance that I will have darker corners to the right. This usually happens in stronger lighting where my shutter max out in 1/4000 seconds in iso 100</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That last sentence makes it sound like the falloff is worse at high shutter speeds. Is that right? If so, that's also hard to understand. I can't think of any reason why high shutter speed should make falloff worse.</p>

<p>However that may be, this is a cool project and you're getting some nice images out of it.</p>

<p>@Aron, I don't understand the logic but the falloff is more severe in high shutter speed where my NEX max out in 1/4000 sec in ISO 100 as the aperture is wide open in f/2.8. </p>

<p>This gets me up all night trying to figure out how to place the iris diaphragm on the back of the adapter. <br /> <img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7194/6966698493_58c0b63519_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="425" /><br /> <img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7036/6966696525_75a6185f58_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="425" /></p>

<p>What happens is that when I place the iris diaphragm on the back, the diaphragm actually cut out more light and renders a dark circle even noticeable in shooting with the LCD. I will keep trying with a smaller iris diaphragm and report back, but so far I am not confident that I get better outcomes from my iris diaphragm.</p>

<p>Walter more 110 film for sale here too<br>

<a href="http://filmphotographyproject.com/store/film">http://filmphotographyproject.com/store/film</a></p>

 

<p>A picture of the Pentax Auto 110 24mm, 18mm Pan Focus next to the Sony Kit Zoom</p>

<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7167/6426105749_1a9afb0bb8_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="374" /><br>

filter size from left to right: 25.5mm, 30.5mm, 49mm</p>

<p>And there is no focus ring on the 18mm Pan Focus. It pan focus from 1.75m (6 ft) to infinity. I used it a couple of times in night street shooting. <br>

<img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7151/6426128611_b3589c8713_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="425" /></p>

<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7014/6426132013_fe871b633f_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="425" /></p>

<p>Is it my imagination, or are these lenses actually a bit smaller than the Pentax Q primes?! Quite amazing, considering that they cover a much larger image area.</p>

<p>R.T. Dowling wrote:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Is it my imagination, or are these lenses actually a bit smaller than the Pentax Q primes?! Quite amazing, considering that they cover a much larger image area.</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

<p>Well, they have no auo-focus mechanism, no aperture coupling and not even a diaphragm! Just a helicoid and five or six pieces of glass.</p>