Interesting comments. The purpose of selling my digital stuff would have been to fund a possible 645Nii or more likely a 67, using a mixture of 35mm and my MX-1 for 'everyday' shooting.

My maximum so far is about 250 shots in a day (action photos) resulting in about 20 keepers. I realised I've so many shots that are 'nearly excellent' but end up looking mundane once I've critiqued them myself (mostly composition, focus errors or shake). There's always something I'd wish I'd done differently despite looking at the screen between shots.

When I looked at some of my old slides recently, there's something there I don't get with digital. I'm left wondering why if I could shoot that, then, with a manual camera and a miniscule margin for error - why can't I do so now?

Hi & welcome the forum.

Hi All,

I've been slowly increasing the amount of film I'm shooting (from zero a couple of months ago to a few films a month now) and nearly made the decision last night sell off my K-5 & DA lenses (moderated today to shooting film exclusively for a while - apart from the MX-1).

This has been driven by a couple of factors:
1) I've got too many film bodies (far too many) and wanted to test some of them before potentially putting them up for sale. As such I now have un-finished rolls in various cameras.
2) I'm shooting too many digital shots, the good ones are getting lost in a maelstrom of mediocre ones and I'm losing the 'wow' factor I first had with digital.
3)I dug out my LX last night, attached my new finders and a lens...

I'm hoping that I'll be able to take more time, be more selective and concentrate on getting the best shots I can. Whenever I look back through my slides libraries, there's something there I just don't currently get with digital.

I'm lucky to have a comprehensive collection of film gear which makes this an easy change for me to make and I'm looking forward to seeing how it goes.

Is this crazy in today's digital world?

John.

Thanks guys (especially LennyBloke for the original pointer).

I had tried, but not knowing which way to twist it, I thought it prudent to ask first.

John.

With some regret I'm selling an SMC-A 50mm f/1.7 in great condition.

Apart from slight dust the glass is clean, no fungus and no obvious marks. There's no oil on the blades and the aperture mechanism is snappy, the focusing ring is smooth. Externally there are no obvious marks (although the mount alignment pip has yellowed). A bit of paint wear on the lettering of the front cap though.

Supplied with original 'Pentax' caps: £65 including UK postage (RMSD).

Payment by bank transfer, cleared cheque or paypal with fees.

Regards,

John.

Just to clarify, it isn't a problem with Pentax DSLRs but one due to Vivitar making their 'PK' lenses different to the Pentax K mount. Thus, when Pentax added the PowerZoom contacts in '91 (later used for SDM), some Vivitar lenses (I also have a Tokina too) won't fit.

Selected Pentax film bodies also have these contacts, namely the Z-1/Z-10 and some of the MZ line (including the MZ-M - which although it doesn't have the contacts, does have the lug used to attach them).

John.

Hi All,

First a massive thanks to whoever posted the thread about the FB-1 & FC-1 LX 'finders on ebay last week (can't find the thread now). As I wear glasses, the extra long eye relief is much more comfortable.

If anybody knows how the two separate (it's a bayonet fitting apparently) I'd be grateful for any info?



Pentax LX FB-1 & FC-1 #1 by John Halliwell, on Flickr



Pentax LX FB-1 & FC-1 #2 by John Halliwell, on Flickr

Re-posted to correct typos.

Regards,

John.

With the 645D putting out 7264 x 5440 pixels, you'll never see the benefit on a PC screen, even the next generation '4K' TVs won't show the benefit completely (IIRC the human eye only has a vertical resolution of 4000 'lines').

The real benefit from medium format is not just the resolution, but the increased tonal graduation. Changes of tone/colour are spread across many more pixels giving a much smoother transition. This was immediately obvious with my Lubitel 166 with it's comparatively soft lens.

John.

Looks like they're more interested in getting ads on there whilst the new layout is hot news...

I quite like the new layout (but wish it would actually work - even the help forum looked like it was down before). Started to see ads on there tonight with the inevitable slow-down

The problem as I see it though, is that wherever you move to might soon have a 'refresh' of their own. If you're paying nothing (or peanuts - and flickr pro [oops 'Ad Free'] is peanuts in the grand scale of things) you'll always be subject to the whims of their designers/commercial departments.

The only real alternative is your own hosting/website arrangement and that's an awful lot more aggro.

John.