hefty1

Joined: 28th June 2007

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

hefty1
You could certainly get a very good second hand Pentax body for £250 (and you're not too far shy of a new one either) which would allow you to use your existing screw mount lenses with an adapter, however, there are a couple of caveats:

Firstly, you wouldn't be able to use them in shutter-priority mode. The lens would effectively be "dumb" (no camera-lens communication) so you would have to use them exclusively in manual mode with stop-down metering (just as you used them on your SP500). On the brightside you will get focus confirmation and shake reduction as they are functions of the camera independent of the lens attached.

Secondly, the SP500 is probably the least desirable of all the Spotmatic bodies and is unlikely to fetch more than around £10 - you'd probably be better off just keeping it as a back up or for nostalgia's sake.

If you do buy a Pentax digital body then the chances are you'll find the "kit" lens thrown in. It won't set the world alight but it's not bad and the 18-55mm focal length range translates to about 28mm to 85mm in old money. The lens is autofocus and, more importantly, will allow you to use the camera in all its modes (shutter priority, aperture priority, program, scene, etc) as well as just manual. Then you'll have a choice as to whether you want the exceptional quality of your old Takumars or the convenience of a modern zoom - both have their place depending on the situation in hand.

Comment by hefty1 posted on Pricing S/H gear at 10/05/2011 - 12:59

hefty1
Sold - thanks for looking everybody and thanks to Duane for stopping me from keeping it...

Comment by hefty1 posted on For Sale - K-7 Body £375 at 08/05/2011 - 23:49

hefty1
Yes just £375, no that's not a typo.

I'm selling this on behalf of a friend who has upgraded to a K-5. The reason it's so cheap is that the box and most of the original accessories were "misplaced" during a house move. Here's a picture of what you'll actually get for your money:

[IMG]http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd37/hefty1969/stuff%20for%20sale/IMG_1634.jpg[/IMG]

There's the camera body (build date 30/06/09, shutter count 7123) with body cap, strap protectors, hot shoe cover, PC socket cover and rubber eye cup installed.

In addition there's a third-party battery, a third-party charger, USB cable, A/V cable and a printed manual (which he bought from eBay - not original but not cheap either).

There's no box, no other paperwork and no software (although as I get the feeling I'm the only person on these boards that actually likes Pentax Photo Lab I doubt any of you will care about that ).

I've taken a few test shots (mainly to get the shutter count) and it all seems to work perfectly. The cosmetics are excellent with just a tiny amount of rubbing on the hotshoe where a flashgun has been on and off (see pic below).

[IMG]http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd37/hefty1969/stuff%20for%20sale/IMG_1635.jpg[/IMG]

I know he's looked after this camera very carefully and has never had any problems with it, he just wants to recoup some of the money he's spent on the K-5. As he's a bit skint I've already given him the cash so technically the camera belongs to me now, except I can't really afford it right now either so I'm just looking to get my money straight back - hence the giveaway price for a quick sale.

Payment via PayPal, cheque or cash (if you want to collect it from the Aylesbury area). Postage will be extra at cost, for the UK that will be £7 for Royal Mail Next Day Special Delivery. I don't mind posting overseas but I'll only send via a tracked/insured service so it'll probably be in the region of £20-40 depending on where you live.

Someone please buy this quick before I end up keeping it - there's only so long I can keep repeating the mantra "there is nothing wrong with your K10D..."

First to PM me with a confirmed offer wins.

Comment by hefty1 posted on For Sale - K-7 Body £375 at 08/05/2011 - 19:26

hefty1
[quote:3496ace15f="pentaxian450"]Since the topic seems to be on prints, here's my latest large format printer: ]https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/x95Ownk0qtdlkBzpdWOjwNmpfYh8sk_zEiORYDw27p...

I don't think that would quite fit on my desktop

Comment by hefty1 posted on Pixels per dot...a printing question at 08/05/2011 - 16:08

hefty1
My elderly Epson prints at 1440dpi so 360ppi makes good sense.

Comment by hefty1 posted on Pixels per dot...a printing question at 06/05/2011 - 14:21

hefty1
Brilliant - cheers Chris

I was going to go to Santa Pod for that bank holiday anyway so it'll make a nice change to see something other than dragsters locally.

Comment by hefty1 posted on Coventry Stadium F1 Heritage And BriSCA F2 Stock Cars at 06/05/2011 - 14:17

hefty1
mtrafford wrote:
This is probably not precisely on topic but some might find it interesting.

The default printing resolution that's usually quoted is 300 dpi, so an 8x10 would be 2400 x 3000 pixels. However, 300 dpi is what used to be requested by publishing houses for magazine reproduction. I always understood, and I haven't tested this, that it is better to have the printing resolution a divisor of the printer resolution. 300 doesn't go into 1440 but 360 does and that is why I've always used 360 when doing prints, with great success over the years.
That is quite interesting actually, I might give that a go.

Comment by hefty1 posted on Pixels per dot...a printing question at 06/05/2011 - 14:08

hefty1
It will depend on the printer so you'll need to look up the resolution for yours in the manual, however, here's an example of how you can calculate it:

Let's say you're printing a photo that contains 300 pixels per inch (fairly standard stuff) and you're using an inkjet printer with a resolution of 1440 dots per inch (again, fairly standard). To calculate the number of dots the printer lays down to represent each pixel you divide the second number by the first, so:

1440/300 = 4.8

That will tell you the number dots in one direction (horizontal or vertical) so to get the whole picture you need to square it:

4.8 x 4.8 = 23.04

So in this example the printer is laying down 23.04 dots of ink to represent each pixel that makes up your photo. The printer needs to lay down multiple ink dots (compared to the number of pixels) because it has to replicate the RGB colours using only a limited palette (CMYK and possibly LC/LM/etc depending on the printer) and so resorts to mixing them.

Hope that helps

Comment by hefty1 posted on Pixels per dot...a printing question at 06/05/2011 - 09:50

hefty1
Do you know of any classic hot rod racing coming up in the near future? As a kid my bedroom walls were plastered with posters of Barry Lee's Escort and George Polly's Anglia and I'd love to go and see some 60s/70s style short oval saloon racing.

Comment by hefty1 posted on Coventry Stadium F1 Heritage And BriSCA F2 Stock Cars at 06/05/2011 - 09:32

hefty1
That AP looks familiar, think I just sold one of those...

Comment by hefty1 posted on 1957 and 1958 vintage... at 05/05/2011 - 17:08

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo