All Forum Comments
Comment by hefty1 posted on FA 35/2: Planar? Tessar? at 24/01/2011 - 18:28
Comment by hefty1 posted on repairer for K10d at 24/01/2011 - 11:32
I've never read it, but from I've heard about it in some ways we are living it.
Comment by hefty1 posted on Final words at 23/01/2011 - 16:25
I was wondering what condition you think the gear is in, would it be classified as mint?
As for film, my recommendations are Fuji Reala 100 or Kodak Ultramax 400 for colour print, Ilford Delta 100 or HP5+ for black and white. The two you mention won't show any camera in its best light, so for the sake of a couple of quid I'd get something half decent if it were me.
As Matt says above, being able to advertise the body as "tested with film" (and showing some examples) will do wonders for its resale value. I don't think ME Supers are inherently unreliable, but a lot of them out there have been heavily abused and they are 30+ years old now. Yours doesn't look like it falls in that category so I would imagine it should work just fine. If you want a PDF manual for it you can download one from here (password is "Pentax" - case sensitive).
Comment by hefty1 posted on Pentax ME Super + M50 f1.4 + M135 f3.5 MINT? at 23/01/2011 - 00:47
As mentioned above, the ME Super and the 135mm are both common (albeit good for use) so don't expect big money for either - £20-30 each sort of ball park. The 50mm should see you get minimum £70 back and probably more depending on how many people see your listing.
If you're not in a huge rush though I'd suggest running a roll of film through it before selling it - the M50 is generally considered to be one of the best 50's ever made by any manufacturer, you may well find your FE2 goes instead...
Comment by hefty1 posted on Pentax ME Super + M50 f1.4 + M135 f3.5 MINT? at 22/01/2011 - 23:34
:::
Comment by hefty1 posted on Final words at 22/01/2011 - 23:20
have you seen one in that price range then ????
If you mean the Rolleis then yeah, hundreds of them - take your pick!
This thread got me thinking........
I once had an AGFA Isolette 220 roll film camera that I picked up, with a damaged bellows for a couple of quid.
I repaired the bellows and was off around London with my new toy. I've probably still got it somewhere. I never realised its full potential as my enlarger was 35mm only so I never made anything other than contact prints. I will still have the negs too.
Not in the same league as the Pentax 645 system, but I might dig around for it and the negs from it.
Come to think of it I haven't even scanned any of my 35mm work either!
Warm up the scanner..........I'm gonna be busy.
Thanks guys for the idea.........
MZ
My Super Ikonta IV (admittedly one of the more advanced folders out there) had a wonderful Zeiss Tessar that was easily the equal of other MF cameras I've used. Much more pocket friendly than an MF SLR too...
Comment by hefty1 posted on DIGITAL OR MEDIUM FORMAT FILM at 22/01/2011 - 23:15
I sold my Pentax 645 outfit as I prefer the square 6x6 format, plus I have an unhealthy obsession with TLR cameras (which Pentax have never made of course). With that in mind it should come as no surprise to hear that if I were in your shoes I'd buy a Rolleiflex T, Rolleiflex Automat or Rolleicord Va/Vb for that sort of money. If you're more comfortable with SLR cameras though buy a Pentax 645 and enjoy it - the picture quality is sublime.
Comment by hefty1 posted on DIGITAL OR MEDIUM FORMAT FILM at 22/01/2011 - 19:59
If I saw one for sale for £35 with a free camera attached I'd snap it up in a heartbeat.
Comment by hefty1 posted on Westex Lens M42 at 21/01/2011 - 18:02
Old flashes are worth very little and being dedicated actually hurts the value (non dedicated models can be of interest among users of several brands). The only ones that are worth having at that age are those that offer both bounce and swivel movements along with full manual control (like the Vivitar 283/285 variations for example) - eveything else tends to fetch landfill prices unfortunately.
Comment by hefty1 posted on HELP PLEASE! What would be a fair value of this set? at 21/01/2011 - 17:57


None of the DA or FA Limiteds conform to a Zeiss patent, although the DA40 is similar to the offspring of a Tessar and a Heliar.
Most of what is posted in the thread you've linked to could be reasonably be filed under "total guff".