Lilly,

Great! Of course - we expect nothing less from you!

The first image is amazing - the backlit clouds and the reflection on the path!

It would easily stand alone as a wonderful picture.

Thanks for sharing

Tony and George,

You're absolutely correct with regard to the prints. I just talked to the kids at the mall and they said it's out of their hands - the developing machine is on full auto - they can't override it. Peering at the negatives, I don't see huge differences - in fact, I can't see ANY!

I'll run a slide film through in more controlled conditions - may take a while, but I'll get back to y'all.

John,

I didn't mean to imply that the Samsung isn't the same as the Pentax 18-55mm, I just didn't have a Pentax to compare, and was comparing it to older lenses It did really well on clarity - even against my beloved M42 primes at 28mm and 55mm.

I'm really happy that the Schneider and Pentax 18-55mm really are the same - saved me a bit of money.

Thanks for all your input, folks!

Thanks Hefty!

I'm going to do this test again under much more controlled lighting - ie: no window light.

I may run a series with AF280T flash as well. (I've just received a little sock-type diffuser to try out).

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that mixed lighting was the catalyst.

As to the Super Takumars vs SMCs, I remember reading an old article which lamented the upgrade. (A really OLD article). The author primarily complained about skin tone. Maybe there was something to it.

The reason I love these old Super Taks (and Screw Mounts in general) is their beautiful build quality and silky handling. They went out of production as much as 37 years ago and may be as old as 43 years.

The only thing I can relate the handling of these wonderful pieces of machinery to, are classic firearms.

I guess the limited lenses still have that quality, but are WAY out of MY grasp!

Anyhoo, I'll try this again and let you know.

Cheers

Hi,

I ran some very unscientific tests on film the other day. I thought I was testing lens sharpness between my primes and zooms, but the most striking difference was colour.

I used my SFX on a tripod and focused on a collection of knicknacks in front of a pale yellow wall (about the colour of a hard-boiled egg yolk). The indoor lighting was from a mixture of window light and compact flourescents. (I'd guess 80% room light). The film was 100ASA Kodak Gold.

Skim the next details quickly;

I tested my 28mm SMC prime against an SMC FA 28-80 set at 28mm and a Samsung Xenon 18-55 set at 28mm. All were set at f4 and shots were about 1/4 to 1/2 sec.

I did the same test with a 50mm 1:1:4 Super Takumar, a 55mm 1:1.8 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar, a 1:4 Super-Multi-Coated Macro, an SMC 35 - 70mm Zoom, an SMC 28 - 80mm Zoom and the Samsung 18 - 55 Zoom. All set at 50mm, f4 and shot again at about 1/4 sec.

Then two Super Takumar 1:135 (f3.5 and 2.5) primes against an SMC 1:4.5 80 - 200 Zoom set at 135mm.

Here is what I discovered.

That pale yellow wall ranged from accurate, through bright yellow to pale orange and pale green.

Most of the SMC shots were in the bright yellow, the Samsung tended to pale green and the old Super Takumars seemed the most accurate.

I attribute the orange - tinted shots to slight underexposure on the SMC 80 - 200. (I'll try this again and give it another 1/2 stop).

I guess my question is if there is a difference between those grand old Super Taks vs SMC?

I saw a real difference with the Samsung Digital (pale green), but don't have the SMC version to compare.

I thought that flourescent lighting was closer to sunlight, but could this be what's triggering these variances? (Another advantage to digital, where you can control the white balance?)

Any and all comments most welcome.

Cheers!

Mongoose,

Tag.

You're it.

Now you have to buy one and do a side-by-side comparison for us!

That'll teach you!

Welcome to the best camera forum. Ever!

Yes, I, as the owner of 6 Pentax film cameras, believe that Pentax is your very best bet.

Right now there are several good bodies available on eBay.

I would try for an MX for sure.

I also owned Yashica and Minolta 35mms. After a while, they just didn't do it for me any more and I gave them away.

Besides, how can you enjoy our company in good faith without owning a Pentax?



Cheers

I think I see slot-headed screws there, which leads me to think that it may go as far back as the original Spotmatic.

Like Reuben, I agree that it is definitely for the Spotty series.

Put it back on eBay with the correct description and I'm sure it will sell.

Good Luck with finding one that fits!

Wow, Chirpy!

Certainly no problems there!

Nice shots.

Cheers

Roseanne,

I've looked at all your pictures, and many of your fellow members' shots.

You belong to a very good club, and I'd rank your eye as one of the best, if not THE best, in my opinion.

Your camera has produced many wonderful images, and I really hope its problems get resolved.

It would be nice if you could continue to work with gear with which you are so obviously comfortable.

I'm keeping a good thought ...

Good luck

Don,

It'll always be "Don's Super Program". It is a very special piece of gear .

I'm only a foster parent for now as this little gem plays out its destiny.