Pen FT questions

[jamiew]

I am a begining photoprapher and have started reading some

information on the Pen FT. The things that interest me are:

- Big film cost savings with two times as many pictures per roll.

- Smal;est SLR.

- Very good lens selection.

 

Things that worry me:

- Negative size.

- Price

 

That's about it. Normally the small negative would have been a deal

breaker for me, but I have read that at 8x10 it is functionally only

25% smaller that full frame 35mm because less cropping is needed.

 

What I am wondering is if anyone has any experience with this camera,

and can comment on what size enlargements I can expect to get,

prices, resources, etc...

 

Thanks in advance for any help.

[art_haykin]

I had a couple of them YEARS ago, and they are well built, but lenses and repairs may be a problem. Around that time, Ilford came out with a 72 exposure film, and you'd get 144 shots per roll. It has a porro-mirror instead of a pentaprism, as I recall, and the optics were great.

[charles_stobbs2]

I have used two half frame cameras, a Pen S

and a Pen D. IMHO slide transparencies are

excellent but prints from drugstore processors

are bad (probably because they are annoyed by

having to change their machine set-up and

will receive less money overall than for

processing two full frame rolls).

[al_kaplan1]

They had great lenses. Pictures require 33% more enlargement, not a huge problem, about the difference between an 8x10 and an 11x14. Parts may be a problem if you need repairs. Batteries require substituting non-mercury cells, and can get expensive. The meter cells themseves deteriorate with age. I'd look at it as a meterless body for actual use. Lastly, "porroprisms" are an arrangement of several front surface mirrors which may tarnish in time, darkening the viewfinder image. The biggest problem is the cost. They're popular with collectors in Japan and Hong Kong thus pricing them out of consideration as an economical "user". If you're lucky enough to pick up an inexpensive Pen outfit at a yard sale or such, regardless of condition, go for it! If it all looks next to brand new, has the boxes, papers, intruction booklets, caps, filters, cases, etc., grab it! But don't shoot with it; list it on eBay and buy something newer to use. If it looks used and beat-up go ahead and use it.

[art6]

Jamie:

 

I'm sure that Al knows more about this than me. I haven't thought

about these in a while. As I recall, they had a unique shutter

system [was it rotary?]. When it failed [and it did], you couldn't get

it repaired. Maybe that has changed. I remember them as giving

good quality slides; not as good as the Alpa half-frames, but

good. I would suggest that the solution to your problem would be

getting a digital camera. ;<)

 

Art

[stephen hazelton]

Will the drugstore type developers actually print each frame on a separate print? Or will they just print pairs of frames on each print?

 

It seems that you could easily kill all your cost savings on the film if you had to go to any extra trouble to get them processed. You may want to check with your processing service and see if they will actually do the half-frame. My experience with drug-store type processing in general is that they do a good job on run-of-the-mill type stuff, but anything out of the ordinary can easily mess them up.

[dan_fromm1]

When I started out in 1970, I was a GI in Germany and wanted to take nice tourist pictures to send home. So I looked at and played with the nice cameras in the PX. Read the instructions too.

 

A Pen FT was among the PX's cameras. Cute as a tick then, still as cute now.

 

So why didn't I get one? Because the TTL metering was poorly realized. Horribly poorly realized. The lenses had conventional f/stop markings. The meter had a scale, ran from 1 to 7 if I recall correctly. The lenses, same as were sold with the Pen F, each came with a paper strip marked 1, 2, ... , 7 that was to be aligned as per the instructions with the f/stop markings and taped on the lens. To shoot with an FT, one selected a shutter speed, then looked in the finder to see which number (1 to 7) the meter said to use, then set the lens to that number, then recomposed and shot.

 

That's why I didn't buy one. Even more cumbersome to use than the Pentax Spotmatic, which I also didn't buy. Strongly suggest you get an instruction book to find out whether my memory has failed completely or is still working. If its still working, think a little about whether you can stand to use one.

 

If you must have a 1/2 frame SLR with interchangeable lenses, look for a Konica.

 

If you must have a tiny SLR, Olympus OMs or little Pentaxes (ME, ... ) are possibilities.

 

Cheers,

 

Dan

[the_macman]

If price is your concern, look wider. Many manufacturers made half-frame

cameras. http://www.subclub.org/shop/halframe.htm.

Question: are there any half-frames currently in production?

[richard_oleson]

I have a pen FT, and i'd say all of the above comments are pretty much right on. it doesn't require much more enlargement than full frame unless you really like a 1:1.5 aspect ratio that you can't find frames for anyway, and although the original pen F had a somewhat fragile shutter, you probably won't have trouble with your FT.... and it synchs electronic flash at 1/500 second. lenses were quite good, but of very old design today and wideangles hard to come by. i have the Pen/OM adapter, which allows use of my OM lenses on the FT, but the adapter is pricey today and it doesn't give automatic aperture stopdown. and it doesn't add a whole lot at the wideangle end, though my 21mm OM is wider than any Pen mount lenses i have....

 

the main downsides are processing support, both for transparencies and for prints, and the above mentioned very awkward metering system. later lenses had the "meter index" numbers engraved on them, but this didn't really do much toward making it a practical system. it was the price they paid for developing the lens system before they designed the TTL meter.

 

olympus made up for this with the OM system, full frame and not too much larger than the Pen F's, and one of the best thought-out systems ever built. slick as the pen ft is, the om1 beats it hands down as a user.

 

both the pen ft and the om1 used PX13 mercury cells, which are no longer available; but either camera can be run accurately using #675 zinc/air cells, and i've gotten over 6 months out of a z/a cell in my om1 (which i consider quite adequate at $1 per battery).

 

if compactness is really of primary importance and you need an SLR, then the FT is an excellent choice.... especially if you plan to process your own film and if you're not too dependent on the in-camera meter.

 

rick :)=

[Brian]

<P>Jamie, you've had some very knowledgeable replies from people who know far more than I do about these cameras. Let me just add a general caution - when you're setting out in photography, avoid non-standard systems and formats unless you know for sure that your <I>photographic</I> requirements are out of the ordinary. I don't count cost savings in this - we most of us try to do things as economically as possible.</P><P>The APS system should be a warning to you - and 110 and disk film: smaller film, smaller cameras, rapidly disappearing off the market, just like half-frame did before them. Full-frame 35mm has stood the test of time and will end up as the most cost-effective and versatile system for you.</P>

[shad]

My first camera was a Pen F; later when it was stolen I bought a Pen FT. Recently, looking at those old slides made me want to go back - great aspect ratio and sharp lens. Plus the camera just felt, and feels, good. Only problem today for me is that I don't know where you can get the slides processed and mounted. If you would like to se some images from back then, I have recently posted a few in my folder at the "Not Contax G Pages" site. George Shadoan

[dharma bummer]

Hey Jamie,

I have read through everyone elses reviews and am an OM system user myself. What i would say is, dont go out and spend the 250$ or so it will cost for you to get a Pen FT just yet, if you want something small and compact you could look into something like a Olympus 35 RC or a Olympus 35 RD rangefinder camera for fairly cheap. With the extra money you have from not investing in the expensive Pen you could get your hands on a used OM-1 MD or OM-2. Later if you decide that you are interested in doing all of your own processing and black and white then consider getting the Pen because it will save you money with the film and is just a great camera. However, when you do decide to get one make sure it is in impecable condition so you can get your moneys worth out of it. I have gone through 5 OM bodies (from updating not breaking down!) and have been very happy with the cameras and the Zuiko optics. I have used both old and new nikons and canons but none of them felt as solid in my hands as a good OM-1. Definatly worth the investment.

[james_farnsworth]

Wal Mart will print them for you, at least mine does, just label them half-frame and talk to the manager. Slides could be a problem, what you need to do is get a scanner and scan them to digital. half frame slides mounts are scarce and tedious to work with