kb244
Well-known
Yesterday I received a recently (November 2016 by Eric Hendrickson) CLA'd Pentax MX with a Pentax-M 28/3.5, I already had three Pentax Mount lens (Pentax-M 50/1.4, Rokinon 85/1.4, Tamron SP Adaptall 90/2.8 1:1 Macro) hence the reason was looking for an SLR counterpart to my rangefinders. Plus the general consensus was they had very large/bright viewfinders, but I also wanted to make sure it was fully mechanical outside of the meter.
I went with a formula I found on filmdev.org which calls for stock solution of Microphen for 7 minutes at 68F, course what I didn't realize was that when I set the film speed on top, I must have bumped too far or wasn't attentive enough to notice I put it 2 dots past 400 and was metering for ISO 640. Results still came out, and the massive dev chart shows 640 at 8 minutes, so that explains some head scratching when I was thinking the meter was going a little higher than my guesstimate would have figured.
I'm curious though if the standard 01 screen is sufficient enough for focusing with the f/1.4 lens, I feel like result wise it's not spot on the exact spot, but I was relying more on the microprism ring than the split line, guessing the split is more accurate to "see" in those cases. Though would like to try to see if I can find an SA-3 screen (designed specifically for lens with a maximum aperture of f/1.2 to f2).
I scanned these on my home Canon FS4000US scanner which I prefer over the school's flatbed, but later tonight will be doing some wet printing (some of these might look pretty nice on the Oriental Seagull VC RC II paper I recently got). A number of them are at the GRAM (Grand Rapids Art Museum), then headed back towards campus to snap some spots I usually snap. Most the indoor ones were shot at f/1.4~2, and 1/60th~1/125.
I went with a formula I found on filmdev.org which calls for stock solution of Microphen for 7 minutes at 68F, course what I didn't realize was that when I set the film speed on top, I must have bumped too far or wasn't attentive enough to notice I put it 2 dots past 400 and was metering for ISO 640. Results still came out, and the massive dev chart shows 640 at 8 minutes, so that explains some head scratching when I was thinking the meter was going a little higher than my guesstimate would have figured.
I'm curious though if the standard 01 screen is sufficient enough for focusing with the f/1.4 lens, I feel like result wise it's not spot on the exact spot, but I was relying more on the microprism ring than the split line, guessing the split is more accurate to "see" in those cases. Though would like to try to see if I can find an SA-3 screen (designed specifically for lens with a maximum aperture of f/1.2 to f2).
I scanned these on my home Canon FS4000US scanner which I prefer over the school's flatbed, but later tonight will be doing some wet printing (some of these might look pretty nice on the Oriental Seagull VC RC II paper I recently got). A number of them are at the GRAM (Grand Rapids Art Museum), then headed back towards campus to snap some spots I usually snap. Most the indoor ones were shot at f/1.4~2, and 1/60th~1/125.
dmr
Registered Abuser
Question: How much did your CLA on this cost? Thanks.
kb244
Well-known
I didn't, the previous owner did and it was about 87 according to the receipt shown on the ebay auction.
kb244
Well-known
Forgot to mention, the Tri-X roll was given to me by the professor who knew I liked Tri-X. It expired late last year (December 2016), so I don't think a couple months expired would have any impact, but I also don't know how/where he stored the roll. So if the grain seems *more* than expected, that might be why.
kb244
Well-known
I didn't have time to wet print today, too busy with the digital lab, but I did develop the second roll using the sprint chemistry. Just stuck it on the flatbed in the sleeve and just did a quick scan of it.
The notes I took as I shot each frame (also noticed that I wound one too many and started on '1', instead of '0', so there's 35 frames)
The notes I took as I shot each frame (also noticed that I wound one too many and started on '1', instead of '0', so there's 35 frames)
kb244
Well-known
Some scans from that second roll. Also I disassembled and cleaned my Pentax-M 50/1.4, cleared some dust out of the cam and what not, which is why in the sequence the very last shot at f/22 appeared overexposed and not equivalent (f/16 and f/22 were of the same diameter as it didn't stop down any further).
For this third one, in photoshop, if you were to add a hue/sat or flat color blended layer, and double click the layer under "Blend if...", you can drag the black slider down to around 124, then hold alt and drag the left half of it back down towards 10. What will happen is that color will only show when the image's luminosity is above that range (in this case the highlights which in reality are bright red lights), the alt+click makes the transition smoother rather than just clipping right off when it hits a certain threshold, then you do another, but for the white pointer, kind of one non-destructive way to do split toning digitally.
For this third one, in photoshop, if you were to add a hue/sat or flat color blended layer, and double click the layer under "Blend if...", you can drag the black slider down to around 124, then hold alt and drag the left half of it back down towards 10. What will happen is that color will only show when the image's luminosity is above that range (in this case the highlights which in reality are bright red lights), the alt+click makes the transition smoother rather than just clipping right off when it hits a certain threshold, then you do another, but for the white pointer, kind of one non-destructive way to do split toning digitally.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
1) I like the MX for tactile and size reasons
2) Grain is a bit too much for me though
3) Someday I'm gonna get me that Tamron Adaptall 90mm 2.8 lens.
4) Ever tried the Revuenon 50mm 1.4? It's a Chinon 50mm 1.4 clone with different coating, and almost as nice as a Summilux (gasp)
2) Grain is a bit too much for me though
3) Someday I'm gonna get me that Tamron Adaptall 90mm 2.8 lens.
4) Ever tried the Revuenon 50mm 1.4? It's a Chinon 50mm 1.4 clone with different coating, and almost as nice as a Summilux (gasp)
Dan Daniel
Well-known
Whoa, that's a lot of oversized files!
I'm confused, is there an actual question buried in here? Looks like the camera is working. You seem able to focus.
I'm confused, is there an actual question buried in here? Looks like the camera is working. You seem able to focus.
charjohncarter
Veteran
I have five Pentax SLRs (and two more digital Pentax), they all have been great. My first was 1969 Spotmatic, but I have never owned an MX. Maybe one will break and I'll buy one. Every thing looks good with you new photos.
Cheers!
Cheers!
kb244
Well-known
No question (would have been if there was an issue, and the the issue with f/22 was noted on apug), showing off, and 1080p isn't oversized.
But yes, focus appears to be ok, but did figure out that f/22 on the 50mm wasn't shopping down any further past f/16, so cleaning helped fix that.
Shot of the camera itself.
