andrewg_ny

Matt might be referring to Arsat 30/3.5 (not 35)? There's also a Kiev 30/3.5, and I think I'm seeing what might be the same lens called 'Zodiac'. Not certain whether or not these will give the full 180-degree diagonal on 645 film, but I imagine they'll be wider than a rectilinear 35mm lens. Perhaps Matt can speak to this. I believe these usually are in the Pentacon 6 mount, and that there are adapters for Pentacon 6 => Pentax 645. I think there are also relatively low-cost tilt/shift lenses with this mount as well. Looks like Mamiya and Bronica offered fisheyes as well, not sure how adaptable those are. though.

Your editing eye and mine may be aligned -- In particular I like the first three shots posted.

Hin, nice (if old) images. I can see why you liked the Kiron. Looks like it is focusing pretty close -- does it feature a close focus or were you using tubes or close-up lens?

This thread is way too long for me to read to find out if my criticisms are a repeat: 1. when I am viewing a site page (for example, a forum thread), and click to sign-in, I should be returned to THAT PAGE after authenticating. I do NOT want to see my profile, and then have to navigate the now-harder-to-use menus to find the forum I was in, then the post, then the page of that post. 2. The 'real name' aspect was one of the good things about this forum. I honestly think less anonymity promotes a closer-feeling community and better behavior. Ending this is a loss -- not only as a policy change, but changing all existing members' names away from their real names. 3. Too hard to find the individual forums, I used to be able to navigate to a specific forum from nearly any page on the site. Now I find myself being sent back to my profile (again, see #1, I do NOT need to see this) or the photo-heavy home pages. 4. Why IS it that I need to keep re-authenticating every time I visit the site from the same browser? P.S. I've been on this site for many years, but the new site is discouraging me from wanting to use it.

While the swappable handgrip sounds like a good idea, I'm a bit put off by some reviewer's complaining that none of them are good. I can imagine a smaller grip working OK if you're only shooting small lenses. I think the K-7/K-5 grips are very good, most people seemed to agree at the time -- the idea that grips on newer bodies would be worse is not appealing. Ergonomically, I think I would miss the dedicated top ISO button and separate dedicated buttons for AE-L vs. AF-L. Why does the loss of the top-mounted ISO button bother me? Because on K-10, K-20, K-7, K-5, etc. you have great direct control of ISO with the eye to the viewfinder. 1. change to Auto-ISO by holding ISO and hitting green button. Note that for this to work right, you need ISO and green buttons to NOT be on the same side of the camera -- one should be on the top, and one should be on the back. 2. change to manual ISO by holding ISO and spinning an e-dial. On pentax bodies where ISO is on the rear 4-directional-pad, changing ISO with camera to eye isn't as smooth. It really seems instead to be intended to change while viewing the rear screen, as the change to/from auto-ISO involves navigating up/down with the 4-directional-pad. P.S. The new photo.net makes me not want to use this site.

(Not liking photo.net's new design. Ate line breaks between paragraphs.)

While I'd expect most 50mm primes would probably better most zooms at that length, I would be a little wary about going for just any old manual-focus lenses with the expectation that they'll be significantly better performers than modern zooms at wide angle, especially when these lenses are stopped down. There may be some, but in addition to reduced convenience (not just the obvious AF and in-body aperture control, but also other features like C/A, distortion, and vignetting correction, both in-body or during post-processing where the EXIF will properly report the modern lens) and many may not actually be better in all respects. I'm not completely up to date on the current D-FA 15-30 vs. D-FA 24-70. I would expect the 15-30 to at least be better in some respects like distortion in the 24-30 range. No idea regarding flare handling or aberrations. Especially If you're shooting from a tripod using live-view manual-focusing, I would also give a good look at the relatively modern manual-focus Rokinon/Samyang primes, they have several available in Pentax K-mount (14/2.8, 20/1.8, 24/1.4, 24/3.5 tilt/shift, 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4, 135/2) and reviews have generally been pretty positive. I'm probably missing a few in my list, I think they may have a macro lens and there are some fisheyes though not sure which are FF-compatible. My inclination would be to start with Pentax's current 28-105 (or even 24-70, though I wonder if it's much better than the 28-105 when both are stopped down) and wait to see whether Sigma's 24/1.4 Art becomes available for K-mount, or also to see how Pentax's lens roadmap progresses in the next 12-18 months -- there is a 'large aperture wide angle single focus lens', followed by a 'ultra-wide-angle single focus lens'. They're not being specific yet but my current interpretation would be something fast in the 28-35 range and something not as fast in the 15-24 range. As new designs I would kind of expect both to be good performers, though neither will probably be especially inexpensive. As for the 50, most are very good when stopped down. If not stopped down as much, the newer (and generally larger) releases are usually better. Even though Pentax doesn't explicitly list them as FF-compatible, it's my understanding that the DA*55/1.4 works well (I would confirm this elsewhere before buying) as does (probably) the inexpensive DA50/1.8. There is also an all-new Pentax D-FA*50/1.4 which should be available shortly--I'd expect this to be better and more expensive than the others I've already mentioned. Again, Sigma has a good 50/1.4 Art that may or may not become available for K-mount. I'd also consider a 50 macro as these can be quite good but I'd be careful as to whether the particular lens is better at your typical subject distances.

<p>Nice, Rick! That Praktica <em>is</em> a handsome little box.</p>

<p>Not sure what 'sensor' you're referring to since this is a film camera. At any rate, it probably does not affect the pictures the camera will take, as it is not in the optical path for taking pictures. The mirror, focusing screen, and prism are only for composing and focusing -- when you trip the shutter, the mirror moves out of the way, the shutter opens, and the film is exposed directly from the lens.</p> <p>I expect it is probably not on the mirror, but if it is, that should be relatively easily visible with the lens detached, and probably removed easily with a puff from an air blower bulb (e.g. Rocket Blower). You should take care with handling the mirror and screen as they can be relatively easily scratched.</p> <p>More likely the dust is trapped up inside the focusing screen between the screen and the prism. I can see how this piece of dust would be annoying, it's up to you how badly you want it gone (again, shouldn't affect the pictures). With some cameras that were designed to interchange focusing screens the screen can be removed through the lensmount but with other cameras you might need to remove the top of the camera to access the prism and screen.</p> <p>Worth returning? Hard to say, if everything else is good. If you're not comfortable cleaning it yourself, a professional cleaning for a camera will cost well over $30, and you probably would not get that $ back when selling...but it could make sense for a camera that you like and want to keep and use for a while.</p>

<p>I'm not sure exactly what you consider a reasonable price. There are also plenty of old cameras on shopgoodwill.com for low prices but it's even more of a gamble whether or not the camera works.</p> <p>I love the KX. K1000 tends to be overpriced because of its name recognition. KX adds self timer and depth-of-field preview, plus shows shutter speed and aperture in the viewfinder, and actually has an on-off switch. KM is somewhere in between...I believe it adds the self-timer and dof-preview. Slightly older spotmatics will be similar but will accept screw-mount rather than k-mount lenses.</p> <p>The older Minolta SRT series are similar but don't use the more commonly available SR44 batteries so need adapters or zinc-air cells, etc. Same story with Konica Autoreflex T2, T3, etc.</p> <p>I also like the Pentax P3/P3n/P30/P30t, etc. Obviously battery-dependendent and a little less of that classic charm but common and straightforward.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Jake, thanks for sharing!</p>

<p>If you're buying film cameras, you'll probably find that the real investment is the lenses (except for the very cheapest common lenses) -- the bodies are relatively cheap. Many very old lenses can still be used on modern digital bodies.<br> As someone suggested above, decide whether you want old-school manual-focus body & glass, or more electronic, autofocus equipment. The best experience is generally from matching the body to the lenses that were designed for it. Better to avoid needing to use adapters, and while newer autofocus glass might have slightly better optics, the controls on the lens (manual focus feel & action, and possibly aperture ring) are probably nicer for use with a manual focus body than the newer, plastic AF lenses.<br> I would pick the sorts of lenses you want to use, then find the right body to mount them on rather than the other way around.</p>

<p>A thread discussing this issue <a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/8-pentax-film-slr-discussion/39450-mz5n-mirror-blocked-service-manual.html">here</a>. IMO one might get some satisfaction out of fixing this if you're interested, but factoring in the time spent it probably makes more $ sense to find another working body since they're inexpensive. I have a -5n that I've been meaning to try and fix (maybe this winter) but ultimately it's worthless now, and if I can't fix it, I probably won't replace it because I already have numerous other bodies.</p>

<p>Pretty sure it has both live view focus peaking and magnification.</p>

<p>I think the silver K-3II is a limited edition, announced back in February 2016. No idea the actual availability as the <a href="http://news.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/rim_info2/2016/20160223_010468.html">original announcement</a> stated only 500 bodies would be sold worldwide.</p> <p>It does look like this model may not be around too much longer, as I'm not seeing any kits for sale at B&H. Just body only, with free BG-5 grip.</p> <p>The 'new tech' that isn't in the older K-3II is most notably Wi-Fi and articulating rear LCD, and I believe the K-70 also offers phase-detect autofocus for live view when using DC or PLM lenses. If I'm missing something important, maybe someone else can remind me.</p>

<p>Douglas, I assume he's talking about the new DFA<em><strong>24</strong></em>-70/2.8, not the old FA<em><strong>28</strong></em>-70/4.</p> <p>Dave, Another likely difference between the modern Tamron/Pentax 24-70/2.8 vs. the old Tamron 28-75/2.8 -- am I correct in my assumption that the old Tamron used body-screw-driven AF, probably without quickshift (handling difference), while the new DFA24-70 probably offers both? I'd also guess that in-body corrections (CA, distortion, etc.) for the new lens are supported, probably not for the old Tamron. I'm also assuming that the new lens is sealed, the old lens, not. There are probably other handling differences, I believe on the newer lens the focus ring is closer to the body and likely doesn't turn when focusing (this you should confirm if it matters to you).</p> <p>You might want to look for comparison of the Tamron-badged 24-70/2.8 for other mounts. Presumably the Pentax-badged version isn't too different, even if there are some differences in physical construction WR/SR, coatings etc. As decent as the venerable 28-75 is, I would be surprised if the newer lens didn't offer improved CA and border performance. For example, for Canon 5D FF - <a href="http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/418-tamron_2875_28_5d">28-75</a> vs. <a href="http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/741-tamron2470f28eosff">24-70</a>. I wouldn't be surprised if the better resolving lens better takes advantage of the K-1's higher-pixel-count sensor as well.</p>

The 'D' on the LCD means data imprinting is enabled -- that is, shooting info (shutter speed. aperture, etc) will be printed on the negative outside the captured image. This is turned on/off by pulling the depth-of-field preview back towards you, holding it there, and pressing the up or down button atop the handgrip.

<p>You say you changed flashes and it stopped. Does this mean your problem is no longer reproducible?</p> <p>I believe the electronics in play here are very simple. On the flashgun's hotshoe foot I believe it just bridges the single contact on the bottom of the foot and the contact between the grooves that the hotshoe's two sides engage. So you should be able to fire the flash by shorting these two contacts. This I have done before.</p> <p>Similarly, I believe the cable does something similar, the inner and outer conductor on the cable are temporarily bridged to fire the flash. I would think you could test-fire the flash and cable by carefully shorting these as well (though they're a bit smaller so probably harder to do; I haven't tried this).</p> <p>Thinking about how this works...if you can do these tests...you should also be able to test the socket or hotshoe on the camera. There should normally be no continuity between the center contact on the hotshoe and the two metal bars on the sides of the hotshoe (that the flash unit foot engages when mounted). When the shutter is triggered, this circuit should briefly be closed. If continuity remains well after the shutter has been tripped, I would think there is a problem in the camera's innards.</p> <p>These innards (x-sync contacts, wiring) seem to be described at length in the <a href="http://pentax-manuals.com/manuals/service/servicemanuals.htm">K1000 service manual</a>. My quick skim suggests that there are two sets of contacts -- one (FP) that is only closed when the mirror goes up, and another (X-Sync) that is opened when the shutter is cocked but closes when the shutter is fired.</p> <ol> <li>mirror down and shutter un-cocked: X-sync closed, FP open.</li> <li>advance film, shutter cocked: x-sync open, FP open</li> <li>shutter button pressed, mirror up: X-sync still open, FP now closed</li> <li>shutter fired and curtains all the way open: X-sync now closes - both contacts are closed so flash fires</li> <li>mirror returns down, X-sync still closed, FP opens to break circuit so flash won't fire again</li> </ol> <p>Given this scheme, I would think the most likely scenario for undesired flash firing would not be when cocking the shutter (as this should open the X-sync contact that was already closed and break the circuit) but more likely that the FP contact does not get opened when the mirror returns. This doesn't quite match your description though. The problem you described several days ago mentioned a lever that was rubbing due to a dent, and a mirror that doesn't always go all the way down. I wonder if there's an extra short here somewhere due to the lever rub and that the FP circuit isn't being opened because the mirror isn't going all the way down.</p>

<p>Michael, I wish I spent more time with my film bodies. I really like the ZX-L as long as I don't start thinking too much about the smallish viewfinder and the less flexible spotmeter control. The MZ-5n or MZ-S are better in that regard...but I actually like the toggle control (surrounding the shutter button) for shutter speed/aperture/EV-compensation more than the harder to operate dials on the MZ-5n and MZ-5.</p>

<p>I don't think Pentax ever made a FA24-70/4. Is it actually FA28-70/4, FA24-90/3.5-4, or F24-50/4?</p> <p>Anyway, gear is fine. As Matt mentioned, you don't really have any wide-angle lens so that may be a little limiting. I suggest practicing a bunch with the flash if you're not comfortable with it.</p> <p>As Matt mentioned, bouncing the flash is good if it works in that venue (bounce-friendly walls or ceilings).</p> <p>When I use P-TTL flash even though it's somewhat counter-intuitive, I like to have the camera in manual mode and let the flash's automatic exposure do its thing...<br> <br />This depends on the level of ambient light but something like manual mode ISO 800, shutter 1/60, aperture F8. </p> <ul> <li>The flash should freeze motion for the subject & camera shake so a modest shutter speed like that can work.</li> <li>F8 helps cover focusing errors</li> <li>Your K-50 is pretty capable with high-ISO so I wouldn't be afraid to increase that beyond 800.</li> <li>flash output will automatically increase/decrease to illuminate the subject. </li> <li>You can adjust the exposure using flash exposure compensation. </li> <li>near stuff will be illuminated by the flash, but background by ambient light. Make background lighter by any of raising ISO, lengthen shutter time, opening aperture (or vice-versa if background is overexposed).</li> </ul> <p>Balancing the ambient light with the flash light will make the pictures look more natural (less flashy), plus the flash won't have to work so hard so will recycle faster. </p> <p>Good luck!</p>

<p>Don't want to scare anyone away with too much information.</p> <p>ZX-7 is fine. For that price I'd expect it to be pristine. Ideally the vendor will accept a return if it doesn't work. It's very much like the ZX-10 you have, but slightly nicer and newer.</p> <p>The next model up from there with similar operation but a few more features is the MZ-6 or ZX-L (same camera, different names for different markets). I would avoid the MZ/ZX-30/50/60 bodies as they have the 'crippled' mount with reduced lens compatibility.</p> <p>Any of these will work fine with lenses that will work on a ZX10. These are not high-end cameras, but are very lightweight and about as easy to use as SLR film cameras get. If you end up liking shooting with this camera, there's a nice & cheap battery pack "Fg" (~$15-20) which allows you to power any MZ/ZX camera with 4xAA batteries instead of the lithium cells, and the extra height it adds to the body can makes it a little more comfortable to hold for some.</p> <p>Some other posters are correct that film & film processing can get expensive vs. digital but since you have some suitable lenses already, these cameras are fun and inexpensive so I see no reason not to get a functioning body for the price of a pizza dinner and shoot a few rolls (for the price of another dinner or two).</p>

Hopefully that Chinar is working out well. I know this thread is a bit old now but for the record, the main k-mount compatibility issue is that some of the later Ricoh lenses that supported program (or shutter-priority) autoexposure on Ricoh bodies can get stuck on later autofocus Pentax bodies -- these later Ricoh lenses have a pin that unfortunately aligns with Pentax's autofocus motor coupler. The OP's bodies are all MF bodies so there's probably no issues with any Ricoh glass.

Bill, I would like to hear more first-hand thoughts on the FZ1000 if you have the time.

I think many of us wrestle with how to increase reach without too much sacrifice in portability and quality. I have sometimes considered something like that FZ1000. It does look pretty good for an all-in-one package, but regarding reach & quality it isn't that much smaller/lighter/cheaper than, say a K-S2 + a DA 55-300 which already offers a 450 equivalent without a TC. I imagine the APS-C sensor probably offers enough performance benefit vs. a 1" sensor to make up for the ~1 1/3 stop slower max aperture (and only 1 stop if you stop at 400mm equivalent). No doubt that adding a second lens to the kit for the short end makes the SLR bulkier and less convenient, plus the FZ is probably a lot better for video. As someone who has tried some SLR kits of various size when on vacation I can see the attraction of the FZ1000. I haven't yet tried to bring my DA*60-250/4 on vacation yet (tho I might if the trip was right), I think I'd have to get used to that before trying anything larger. Those trips sound great, tho I personally would be more interested in the 150-450 tho even that weight and cost gives me pause.

I think that might be on 1/3 stop? I believe the electronic aperture and PLM motor are both improvements for smoother transitions during video. Some other more modern mounts have had electronic aperture for a long time. The PLM motor I believe is comparable to what some makers have been calling stepping motors. I imagine we'll be seeing both of these on some future releases. Interestingly, from what I read the AF during video is supported for DC and PLM motors but I haven't seen SDM mentioned. I don't know whether Pentax actually disables the feature for SDM or screwdrive AF drive lenses but if so this would be some indication of where the tech is heading. A point of some controversy is that the electronic aperture is essentially another mount spec change that is to date only supported via firmware update for the very latest bodies to date. I can understand putting a priority on the bodies still for sale new. So far it's just this one lens...but you do hope that Pentax will provide firmware updates to support this for as many of their older bodies as possible. I don't think it matters too much if it takes them a while but I would hope this can be done at least for bodies as old as K-5 and K-01 if there are technical reasons that the older K*D series cannot be updated (such as available memory).