darren_addy1

<p>That Luminous Landscape article is wrong about the 8 element Super Takumar. The 8-element ("Planar killer" design) has no yellowing Thorium element. It is differentiated by that, the location of the infrared focusing mark (inside the f/4, not outside it,) and a pretty low serial number (don't know that I've ever seen one that started with over "150"). The yellowing Thorium element was the version after the 8 element, a 7 element design, still called Super Takumar.</p>

<p>Actually, I plan to leave the sandwich together and re-purpose it for another project. It came from a 6x7 body that was waaaay beyond redemption that came with a nice 165mm f2.8 lens.</p>

<p>I'm sorry, but Doug Miles is incorrect, at least insofar as the original 6x7 (no MLU is concerned). It removes from the top (just did it myself) with all of the obvious screws. The only part that is NOT obvious is that the two posts (that engage the finder at the front) are also screws that hold in the front side of the screen holding apparatus. They have indentations on each side, at the base, so that they can be screwed out with a spanner set at small size. I didn't have a spanner and was able to spin them out with a regular small screwdriver head (turning them lefty-loosy).<br>

The focusing screen/groundglass appears to be a sandwich of three(?) layers held together with tape on each side. I have not taken my sandwich apart (yet) to confirm.</p>

<p>Nice to see this used with the exact combo I'd be putting on it: Pentax + Sigma EX 10-20mm.<br>

:)</p>

<p>Thank you Edward!<br /> For the record, I don't plan on this being my only tripod (or even an all-purpose tripod) but for macro in terms of versatility and getting the lens where you want it, I don't think anybody argues that the Benbo/Uni-loc isn't unmatched. I agree that I wouldn't get very far trying to take this thing up a mountain, however!<br /> <br />I appreciate the clear instructions and your humor!</p>

 

<p>Can anybody describe (or point me to instructions or manual) for the proper way to wrestle a Benbo/Uni-loc into position without losing your camera or a lens? I found a closeout Benbo 1 (with multi-angle head) at a fairly ridiculous price so it came home with me. So what I need now is the proper technique (the one that doesn't require three hands) for getting the lens pointed where you want it with this beastie. I can guarantee that one hand is holding the camera/lens at all time until everything is locked down, but beyond that I'm a little fuzzy....</p>

 

<p>TIA for any responses!</p>

<p>Terrific Ronald!<br>

Do you need an email address or a snail mail address?<br>

- Darren</p>

<p>No, the article I referred to was for all sorts of dry darkroom chemicals, from developers to fixers.<br>

(I would like to get a copy of The Darkroom Cookbook however. (By the way, Amazon has the 3rd edition at almost 1/2 price, ATTM).<br>

: )</p>

<p>This is a long shot but...<br>

does anyone happen to still have in their libraries Petersen Photographic magazines from the late 70's? I'm looking for an article that was about dividing dry darkroom chemical and mixing up only what you need by the tablespoon/teaspoon method. I remember that the cover was a monochrome RED and I believe that it was either April or Dec. of 1977 (but it could be neither of those). It was definitely in the 77-79 era.<br>

I would love to get a scan of that whole article, if at all possible. Thanks in advance for checking your libraries!</p>

Yeah, just remember that what they bring on eBay is only true if you don't get greedy and list it wrong and you also have to factor in the eBay/Paypal fees you'll pay, etc.

 

The Spotmatic body is a dime-a-dozen on eBay (actually you might get lucky and get $20-25 for it) <- subtract fees

 

The 2x teleconverter is worth next to nothing. The bulb flash stuff is worth next to nothing. The unknown brand 80-200 is worth next to nothing ($5 tops).

 

The Super Takumars are worth SOMETHING. The 200mm will bring between $30 and $75 depending upon condition. If mint and with hood and caps and original case, maybe a bit more. The 50mm f/1.4 is probably the best thing you've got and worth $50-$100 (probably in the middle of that range, but high end and maybe more if mint and with caps and original case (etc.).

 

This is all assuming clear glass, no dust or fungus inside, etc.

Holy cow, Tom. You nailed it there. Good to hear from you! Too bad Millers Falls didn't make folding cameras.

Please don't let anyone here know my "real" identity. (You know how affected people get around celebrities.)

Also, as I mentioned, this was quick trip by an impatient guy wanting to see what it would be like. For optimal macro work, I'd be putting it on a tripod, using some auxillary flash on the subject, and locking up the mirror (shooting it with the 2 second self-timer) to reduce all vibration (and clean the lens).

 

: )

Well, that's what originally drove the idea. I was first thinking about DIY LensBabies and that led me to tilt/shift and that's when I realized that I HAD something that could do some of that. I was hoping that I'd have enough "back focus" (moving the lens back towards the box) that I would be able to achieve infinity focus and still have the rise/fall/side-to-side shift, but I don't. So it is just a macro lens, and it isn't clear to me if the rise/fall stuff is helpful or interesting with macro. I would think that TILT would be, but not sure about the others.

 

In evaluating the lens, keep in mind that:

a) it's a Zeiss lens

b) it was designed to cover a 6x9cm image plane. I'm just taking the sweetest spot out of the middle of that with my 15.7mm X 23.5mm sensor.

The Zeiss-Ikon holds EITHER the ground glass plate on, OR it is replaced with the film pack back. Only the film pack back is modified. The dark slide is glued in and has a hole cut out of it, and the mount is screwed on and also held by J-B Weld.The thin metal that formerly held the film pack is trimmed away (or it would have scrape the front (top) of the Pentax when mounting the "lens".

 

The Maximar also has front rise/fall and shift left-right, but I have yet to see if that is useful in macro work.

<a href="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3131/2754888119_f064ddddce.jpg?v=0"

target="_blank">http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3131/2754888119_f064ddddce.jpg?v=0</a>

<p>

<a href="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3239/2755721080_0f0d2950ba.jpg?v=0"

target="_blank">http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3239/2755721080_0f0d2950ba.jpg?v=0</a>

<p>

It's a 1930 Zeiss-Ikon Maximar 207/3 with a 105mm Zeiss Tessar f/4.5 lens. The innards of a cheapo 2x

teleconverter were taken out to make a combination mount and extension tube (to clear the pentamirror) that was

affixed to a modified film holder. The film holder is removable from the camera. My first (handheld) quick 'n

dirty shots with the lens:

<p>

<a href="http://cgi.unk.edu/tmp/marigold_sm.jpg" target="_blank">http://cgi.unk.edu/tmp/marigold_sm.jpg</a> (small)

<a href="http://cgi.unk.edu/tmp/marigold.jpg" target="_blank">http://cgi.unk.edu/tmp/marigold.jpg</a> (fullsize)

<p>

<a href="http://cgi.unk.edu/tmp/spider_sm.jpg" target="_blank">http://cgi.unk.edu/tmp/spider_sm.jpg</a> (small)

<a href="http://cgi.unk.edu/tmp/spider.jpg" target="_blank">http://cgi.unk.edu/tmp/spider.jpg</a> (fullsize)

<p>

It's the ultimate K200D nerd macro accessory.

;)

Thanks for the link. Don't know if I count myself in with the "megapixel theory masochists" but my hobby is trying to understand everything in the universe.

: )

Just an interesting observation here, but if you've ever looked at the <a href="http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary/">Clarkvision Digital Sensor Performance Summary</a> and seen his Clarkvision "Figure of Merit" formula there, you might wonder where the K200D stacks up. At a 6.07 pixel pitch (others round this up to 6.1) and a 10.2 effective megapixels, here's where the K200D stacks up with the others on his page:

<p>

 

Example CFM values:

<p>

Camera Megapixels Pixel Pitch CFM<br>

(MP) (microns) (MP*microns)<br>

 

Canon 1Ds Mark III    21.1         6.4       135<br>

Nikon D3              12.1         8.46      102<br>

Canon 1D Mark II       8.2         8.2        67<br>

Pentax K200D          10.2         6.1        62            <br>

Canon 40D             10.1         5.7        57<br>

Canon 30D              8.2         6.4        52<br>

Olympus E3            10.0         4.7        47<br>

Panasonic FZ50        10.0         1.97       19.7<br>

Canon S70              7.1         2.3        16.3<br>

Panasonic FZ18         8.1         1.76       14.3

<i>Same sensor as the K10D. Somewhere around 6µm, if I remember correctly.</i>

 

Ah-ha!

6.05µm

You have a good memory, Miserere Mei. THANKS!

Well, that's what I'm learning about, and thus the question. This is probably the most succinct article on the subject, if you are indeed interested:

http://digitalphotography.weblogsinc.com/2005/08/31/does-size-matter-sensors-resolution-and-output/

My Google-Fu is failing me. I can't find the pixel pitch on the K200D sensor anywhere. Most manufacturers seem to

put it right out there, but I don't see that Pentax does. If this same sensor is used in other cameras, perhaps

it can be found there?

 

Thanks in advance for any help!

Michael,

Thanks for pointing out that Hyper system. That one escaped me entirely. Amazing!

 

Why DOES no one mention this stuff?

Well Haleemur,

I have to admit that the Sony line was not really on my radar, so I can't really speak to it's comparison. I do know that the Pentax K200D uses the Sony sensor so the A300 is the same (10.2 megapixels) as you get in the K200D. I guess as far as legacy glass is concerned, if you want to use Minolta A you go with Sony and if you want to use K-mount (or M42 with adapter) you go Pentax. I'm also not wild about the extremely proprietary way that Sony does everything. (Can you say "memory stick", for example?). The AA batteries are not going to be an option with the Sony. I don't know if the Sony has the weatherproofing and stainless steel chassis/lens mount. The pentaprism on the Sony sounds nicer than the pentamirror.

 

People seem to be happy with the Sony A300 and if you want Live View with the tilting screen, then that might tip you Sony's way by itself. I guess I'm more of an anti-Live-View guy. They get a DSLR and then look at the screen to compose? What's the point? You just (in effect) got a P&S that looks like a DSLR. If people don't want to actually look through the lens, then why don't the manufacturers eliminate the pentaprism/pentamirror and (in effect) make a point and shoot that accepts interchangable lenses.

Greetings, all!

There is always a lot of hand-wringing over the Pentax market share, and I think most who frequent this forum

would like to see them doing better (other than the trolls). I think it is important to find out from the people

who CHOSE Pentax, exactly WHY they chose them. Different people will have different reasons, priorities and

backgrounds, but developing a profile of your likely buyers (perhaps even by Country) should prove valuable to

the marketing and development of any company.

 

After doing a good amount of research, I chose the Pentax K200D over the other guys. Here's why:

 

My background: I'm a old-school (U.S.) film shooter. I was on the High School yearbook staff and learned darkroom

there. We shot with Pentax Spotmatics. When I graduated High School in 1977 I used gift money to purchase my own

first DSLR and chose a Canon AE-1. After being unable to shoot outdoors in the winter due to the battery getting

cold, I looked for a camera that needed no electronics to fire the shutter and eventually got an Olympus OM-1.

Before long, a cousin's father-in-law died and I was presented with a couple of Mamiya C33s with 65mm lenses.

I've worked at professional photography studios and then did my own professional photography for a number of

years. I'm now in I.T. Services with a small university and you'd have to call me a Mac Guy (having owned Macs

since 1989).

 

I have been longing for a DSLR for a long time, and trying to keep up with developments. I have a son-in-law who

is a newspaper prepress guy and a hobby photographer. He's now selling/licensing images from his stock and doing

pretty well at it. He shoots Canon 20D. I don't have a lot of discretionary spending money. Three daughters

getting married in a 2 year span will do that to a guy.

: )

 

I did my research. Like the majority of people, I initially was considering Canikon only. I didn't have a real

inventory of any lens mount to cloud my decision. That's pretty important, as I think it is a lot harder to get

people to completely change their lens inventory, as you all know.

 

Pentax came onto my "radar screen" thanks to a favorable review of the K200D in a recent issue of MacLife

magazine. I remember reading a similar favorable review of the K100D in the same magazine, back when it first

became available. As I read it I thought, "Wow. That seems like a lot of features for the money." In fact, I

think this is the point that Pentax marketing really needs to get across. Even their entry level camera (K200D at

the time of this writing) has features only available on the competition's semi-pro cameras (or they don't offer

them at all).

 

My attention was immediately captured by these things:

• The weather/dust resistance (semi-pro feature)

I like to shoot in inclemate weather. Weather/dust sealing just makes sense and is a "peace-of-mind" factor.

• The stainless steel chassis and lens mount (semi-pro feature)

I may be a bit different from most people, I don't know, but I really hated the "toy", lightweight, pure

plastic-y, FEEL of the Rebels. Nikon's offerings were a bit better, but not much. This camera feels more like a

"real" camera and more like a 20D than a Rebel.

• The in-body shake reduction system (not available on Canikon, but is on 4/3 systems like Sony/Olympus).

The jury is out on which system is "better" (IS lenses vs in-body) but anybody can tell you which system will

cost its owner less money AND work with more lenses. HUGE advantage: in-body shake reduction

• Uses non-proprietary (AA) batteries (simply a great idea)

Proprietary batteries mean proprietary chargers and in a pinch you could even use Alkalines and keep shooting. I

get to use excellent (and low cost) Sanyo Eneloops and spend way less overall.

 

 

 

As I looked into it even more these additional things were added to the "Pentax advantages" list:

• ergonomics (the way it fits in your hand, control layout, and the fact that there are some functions taken off

of the menus and put on buttons/switches — also not too many buttons/controls to get overly confusing).

• the fact that I could use any K-mount lens made over the last three decades, and even M42 lenses with an

adapter. (Granted, this is not a consideration for most people, but I saw it as a nice way of adding some focal

lengths without breaking the bank.)

• spot metering (this is HUGE and not offered in the comparable cameras). Again, most P&S upgraders won't have a

clue, but for an experienced photographer understands how useful that can be. A friend with a Canon 20D says if

he could add just one feature his camera, it would be spot metering.

• a kit lens that you don't have to be embarrassed over (this is such a big competitive advantage for Pentax that

hardly seems to get mentioned).

• an 11 point AF system, where the others are 7.

• the dust alert and removal system

• a second (TOP) LCD display (no other entry-level camera offers this).

• 23 custom-programmable functions

 

Now for the biggie: The $100 rebate (U.S.). This means that a kit that was priced at $650 would really only be

costing me $550. The number of features above (that were important/factors to me) made the Pentax a value-added

camera for the same price as Canon XT or XTi (some people say the XTi is actually a worse camera than the XT in

most respects) or the Nikon D40/D60. We call that "more bang for the buck".

 

Image Quality is always mentioned on the Pentax models, and it also gets praise on the noise issue, in general.

And just look at the Pentax K200D's Reader Reviews at Amazon.com. People LOVE it. 5 stars. This is way more

important to me than the reviews of mags like Popular Photography, etc. who appear to be afraid to rank Pentax

higher than their big advertisers: Canon and Nikon, even when the Pentax is clearly features ahead (as outlined

above).

 

Now the things that some people might consider negatives:

• Continuous shooting/buffer issue. If I were a sports/action photographer, this might put the K200D out of my

consideration, but I don't see the 4-5 shots at 3 frames per second (before a short delay) to be a "deal killer".

• Supposedly slow and noisy AF. Maybe I don't know any better, but it seems plenty fast and quiet to me.

• No Live View. I think this is a weird thing to knock the K200D down for considering it's competition doesn't

have it either. You have to go up to the Canon XSi to get Live View and I think comparing those two cameras is

apples to oranges. (Comparing it with the Canon XS would probably be fairer, but it wasn't shipping yet when I

wanted to order.) I was considering the XSi, but would have had to spend SIGNIFICANTLY more dollars to get the

XSi kit, so it really isn't a fair comparison (IMHO). In any event, I think Live View is something that P&S may

look for, but if you are a real SLR shooter you probably don't want it or need it, unless it is on a

cantelievered screen so you can shoot off the floor or over your head or some other way where you can't get your

eye on the viewfinder. Live View requires a CMOS sensor. The K200D has a CCD sensor.

• Lens options. This one is a bit of a puzzler to me. It reminds me of the old Macintosh days when people would

complain about software availablility on the Mac saying "You only have 3 real word processing packages available

on the Mac, while the PC has 10." Well, I'm only going to be using ONE, so as long as I have a great ONE I'm

gonna get the job done. Sure more choice is good, but it appears to me that there are good choices out there for

almost everything. (if you are a long telephoto shooter, Canon's L series certainly has an edge). And nobody

disses Pentax optics.

 

I've only had my K200D for a couple of weeks, and frankly, I'm still learning how to get the most out of it, but

I'm extremely happy with it thus far. It feels very comfortable (and substantial) in my hand, which is really

satisfying. I'm very interested in learning post-processing and will almost always be a RAW+JPEG shooter. I like

the fact that Pentax gives you the choice of choosing the Adobe RGB or sRGB colorspaces. (again, this is

something that the P&S buyer isn't going to know or care beans about, but is a sign of the level of detail and

the way Pentax provides for more serious photographers — even in their entry level camera.

 

If they want to offer an even cheaper DSLR to transition P&S buyers into the Pentax line, then a K2000D that

removes some of these semi-pro features would probably be the way to do it. I think we'll see that at Photokina.

Strategically (marketshare-wise), it is waaaay more important than a FF body (IMHO).

 

The other place the Pentax needs to make inroads is in the camera stores. I've heard from many Pentax DSLR buyers

who (even in stores that carried it) were pushed towards Canikon by the salesperson. I think this is because the

salesperson is unfamiliar with the Pentax and risks looking stupid if even asked about it. It is radical,

perhaps, but I think that Pentax should make a free (in store) demo camera available to any outlet, as an

inducement to carry the Pentax line. They also should have a real program of education that is directed directly

at the people who sell cameras for a living.

 

- - -

My opinions are free and you get what you pay for.

 

 

 

 

 

> For the $$$ the K200 is <strike>hard</strike> IMPOSSIBLE to beat.

<p>

There. Fixed that for you.<br />

: )