once again got 'cut off' in midstream - have sent a complaint e-mail to Tescos about it ! Peter Elgar

Well, I don't know WHAT HAPPENED to my computer; Iwas in the middle of typing my 'STORY'when I was CUT OFF the internet and so I was not 'SIGNED IN!' Of course,'NEW BOY' is 'PENTAX PETE ELGAR' of BRENTWOOD Essex!!

Thanks to John Riley and Kim C for replying;yes, I have the K mount adapter and have used all my screw lenses on my bayonet Pentax's. I sold off most of the screw bodies and went bayonet in the 1980s with an ME Super and MX from David Leung Goodmayes. I also got a 120mm Pentax M f 2.8 lens (gone with my ex-wife!)and kept the screw Electro-Spotmatic Japanese home market camera I bought in Japan in 1973,with the 24mm f 3.5 SMC and 105mm f 2.8 SMC Takumars for about £49 each including Customs Duty and Purchase Tax. The Electro-Spotmatic developed trouble using it on'Auto'as if I took several shots very quickly in sucession the CdS metering evidently had a 'memory'and over-exposed subsequent frames. I spoilt quite a few press pics that way! I sold it to a Pentax collector in Brentwood Photographic Club with original box for £85 ! A good price for a dodgy camera!

Read the discussions on lenses;SMC Takumars against the M series etc. I bought a 135mm f 2.5 SMC Takumar from the Brentwood Gazette when their ES Pentax packed up for £10. It is really sharp,better than a 135mm Pentax-M f 3.5 I got with a ME Super. It also performs well with extension tubes for butterflies. Good job I got another Spotmatic screw camera with various other bits and pieces including a Weston V for £25 through the Brentwood Photographic Club!

What a MINE of information on the Pentax User forums!! Many thanks to KIM for the info and web links,I had a look and put my mind at rest.

I was getting some info from 'the web' now I have the wonderful COMPUTER about Kodak Aero-Ektar lens 178mm f 2.5 and typed in 'Kodak Aero-Ektar Lens' into 'Google'and pages came up with some disturbing discussions about radio-active emissions from Ektars including some 'early Pentax Takumars'such as 55mm f1.8 and 1.4 and 6x7 Pentax Takumars. I own such lenses as well as the Aero-Ektar,which I have tried on my 6x7 with extension tubes to help to focus. I have had it in the house since the 1960s,it is in a cupboard in my darkroom now about 5 feet away from where I work processing and enlarging. The Takumars are in my boy's bedroom in another cupboard. Does any member have any thoughts about possible effects;I don't have access to a Geiger Counter but some of the Americans on the Ektar pages have had their lenses checked and will only keep them in a basement away from their children.[/i]

I just got computerised and am searching the 'net' for photo sites;found an American one where in the Forum was discussion on the fact that Fuji ARE DISCONTINUING VELVIA 50 ASA! That will upset the well-known 'names' using Pentax 6x7 and Velvia such as Lee Frost! Is it TRUE members? Maybe there will be some onfo at FOCUS at Birmingham (by the way PENTAX is noticeable by its ABSENCE in list of exhibitors!)

I found when I used my 6x7 mk II with the extension tubes the AE Prism exposure was not accurate on 'auto' settings unless I used 'stop-down metering'. I can't see any electric connections on the lens,which work OK on open-aperture metering without the tubes,so why do I have to stop down manually when I fit the tubes?

Read your message Kim about Mike Spencer being Good and Cheap! Can you give me his address? Had some repairs done to MX and LX (the famous sticky shutter and perished seals )by a 'Pentax' authorised repairer in Billericay,Essex and NOT VERY PLEASED! Cost £90 for LX seals and about £60 for MX (flash contacts burnt out - went on press job and let me down again so had to go back!). Good job my repairs are TAX DEDUCTIBLE!

Read the discussion with our 'Yank'friend Fiannor;he was not sure what the numbers on lenses mean;can I help?
'f' means 'fraction' or 'factor'when talking about the 'aperture'numbers. The values are worked out to halve or double the amount of light (according to which way you turn aperture ring).As the hole is not a rectangle but a circle,to DOUBLE the value you cannot just double the number,it has to be multiplied by the square root of 2,not just 2. The square root of 2 is 1.414etc ect etc to many decimal places. Now,if we start at an aperture of f1,multiply by square root of 2 we get f1.4 (to NEAREST),take f1.4 multiply by 1.414 etc we get f2,f2x1.414etc we get f2.8 and so on down the aperture numbers. NOW you may ask, what about the PENTAX f1.7 lens? Well,it's expensive to make f1.4 lenses but CHEAPER to make f1.7 which is NOT in the mathematical sequence,but the OTHER NUMBERS ARE. So from f1.7 to f2 is NOT and exact 'factor'of 2.
Hope this helps. Peter Elgar