kb244
Well-known
I know the FT/F is a SLR but I figured I'd try here anyways. I received in my posession a Pen FT (or so I thought) despite some discreperencies I am happy with it, just has some oddities.
Gona go ahead and list off some of the oddies.
1) Has a Hot Shoe that actually works
2) Says FT on the top and on case, but came with an F accessory shoe attachment
3) Viewfinder is just an even black border, no meter window on left or extra black space to acomidate for it.
4) Has a battery compartment in the bottom despite no way for there to be a meter display in the viewfinder, but it is an FT body...
5) Has a microprism spot (which further make it seem like it should be an FT body)
6) Self Timer is broken or at the very least doesn't seem like it's attached to anything.
7) There is ASA setting on shutter dial, and the 0-7 setting on lens which would be on an FT.
Other than the microprism spot, everything internally seems to be more like an F rather than an FT. When I open the bottom theres only one blue wire connecting to the battery but not another wire, then a red one near the middle which seems like they mighta used an FT body and it's wiring to wire the hot shoe to the shutter tripping.
I couldn't tell you what the serial number is since the hot shoe is on there permenetly. But appears to end in 734.
Simply put it just seems... odd, but I think I'm going to like it regardless.
Gona go ahead and list off some of the oddies.
1) Has a Hot Shoe that actually works
2) Says FT on the top and on case, but came with an F accessory shoe attachment
3) Viewfinder is just an even black border, no meter window on left or extra black space to acomidate for it.
4) Has a battery compartment in the bottom despite no way for there to be a meter display in the viewfinder, but it is an FT body...
5) Has a microprism spot (which further make it seem like it should be an FT body)
6) Self Timer is broken or at the very least doesn't seem like it's attached to anything.
7) There is ASA setting on shutter dial, and the 0-7 setting on lens which would be on an FT.
Other than the microprism spot, everything internally seems to be more like an F rather than an FT. When I open the bottom theres only one blue wire connecting to the battery but not another wire, then a red one near the middle which seems like they mighta used an FT body and it's wiring to wire the hot shoe to the shutter tripping.
I couldn't tell you what the serial number is since the hot shoe is on there permenetly. But appears to end in 734.
Simply put it just seems... odd, but I think I'm going to like it regardless.
Last edited:
ZeissFan
Veteran
The hot shoe doesn't look original, because it covers the body serial number. I will make a wild guess that possibly this camera began life as an "F" and had the hot shoe added after it was purchased. And possibly that's when new top and bottom plates were installed from an "FT."
Guess you'll never know.
My FT has no hot shoe, just the slide-on accessory shoe that must be removed in order to rewind the film.
My FT does show the in-viewfinder meter
Guess you'll never know.
My FT has no hot shoe, just the slide-on accessory shoe that must be removed in order to rewind the film.
My FT does show the in-viewfinder meter
raid
Dad Photographer
The F has no meter whereas the FT has a meter. Go with this distinguishing feature.
Very odd hot shoe, never seen a Pen SLR with that, clearly a custom adaptation.
Definitely stock FT top and bottom covers. Odd about the lack of meter indication... That could have been blocked off while they were working inside on the hot shoe. Or it could be an F or FV body (or finder parts). Given the bottom plate, which is unique to the FT, it seems likely to be an FT frame also.
Question: Film wind... is it single-stroke or double stroke? The original F was double-stroke, while the FT and (meterless) FV were single stroke.
The F did not have a self-timer, the other two did. But I think it tended to break and might have been removed. My FV has a round chrome plug where the lever and its shaft should be.
I've never had an F to see what its screen's focusing aid is like, but the FT and FV have the microprism spot you mention. The FV is missing the meter display and the screen is a bit brighter because no light is siphoned off for a meter.
Looks like a pretty clean sample, Karl! And the 38mm f1.8 is reputed to be the sharpest of its various normal lenses. BTW, the clip-on cold-shoe is blamed for breaking off bits of the black plastic eyepiece... if yours is intact that's another point in its favor.
Definitely stock FT top and bottom covers. Odd about the lack of meter indication... That could have been blocked off while they were working inside on the hot shoe. Or it could be an F or FV body (or finder parts). Given the bottom plate, which is unique to the FT, it seems likely to be an FT frame also.
Question: Film wind... is it single-stroke or double stroke? The original F was double-stroke, while the FT and (meterless) FV were single stroke.
The F did not have a self-timer, the other two did. But I think it tended to break and might have been removed. My FV has a round chrome plug where the lever and its shaft should be.
I've never had an F to see what its screen's focusing aid is like, but the FT and FV have the microprism spot you mention. The FV is missing the meter display and the screen is a bit brighter because no light is siphoned off for a meter.
Looks like a pretty clean sample, Karl! And the 38mm f1.8 is reputed to be the sharpest of its various normal lenses. BTW, the clip-on cold-shoe is blamed for breaking off bits of the black plastic eyepiece... if yours is intact that's another point in its favor.
raid
Dad Photographer
Doug is correct and I stand corrected; the FV is meterless. This looks like a hacked FT/F combo.
kb244
Well-known
I am gona go shoot some kodak ultratec with a vivitar 283 flash on the hot shoe, brb (it's ISO 6 so I'll have to use a flash but least I can develop by inspection in a tray).
Cale Arthur
---- ------
My guess is someone removed the entire metering system (or transplanted the mirror box from an F/FV) in an effort to make the viewing a little brighter.. what does the mirror itself look like, specifically the back of it?
The fact that the wind lever goes all the way to the right of the body says 'FT' as well - regular 'F's had the wind lever sitting slightly inboard w/no notch all the way out..
--c--
The fact that the wind lever goes all the way to the right of the body says 'FT' as well - regular 'F's had the wind lever sitting slightly inboard w/no notch all the way out..
--c--
Last edited:
Film dino
David Chong
The "F" engraving is in gothic script (similar style to the "F" on the lens cap) & has a two-stroke film advance.
kb244
Well-known
Front and back of the mirror.Cale Arthur said:
Last edited:
Cale Arthur
---- ------
I may be way, way off base here, but i had thought that FT's had a different mirror layout & look. That one looks just like my FV, which could support the transplanted mirror-box theory.
--c--
--c--
ferider
Veteran
Looks like an FT with two mods:
- replacement of inside half-transparent/meter mirror with full mirror (get rid of meter and increase vf brightness by one stop)
- addition of hotshoe (pretty cool, I find).
Roland.
- replacement of inside half-transparent/meter mirror with full mirror (get rid of meter and increase vf brightness by one stop)
- addition of hotshoe (pretty cool, I find).
Roland.
kb244
Well-known
Well whatever it was with the mirror, I like it I was actually able to focus after dark outside with only minor difficulties. I expected it to be a lot darker of a viewfinder, and I normally shoot with f/1.4 and f/1.8 lens on my other SLR so I know how tht is.ferider said:
Oh Tried to post these earlier but probably didn't work, a couple shots from the camera tested with a Vivitar 283 flash on top using Kodak UltraTec (iso 6), the gnomes were outside after dark.
All of the ones below were shot at f/1.8
It's nice that you can focus as close as 1 foot
Last edited:
Film dino
David Chong
Ferider is right, it's a cool mod; one stop extra-brightness is well worth having. I have an F & have used an FT in the past & the difference in finder brightness is appreciable. The built-in meter wasn't much help, for me anyway. I tried to find an FV- these are thin on the ground- & eventually settled for an F, despite the less- easy-to-focus ground glass screen
Cale Arthur
---- ------
Nice shots, Karl.. whatever the deal is, i'm glad you found one.. knew you were looking for a minute. Sadly, my FV is again in a state of disrepair (blown main shutter cam) after a trip to Detroit. Am currently on the hunt for a 'parts' body, which should be fun.
--c--
ps: I think Roland nailed it.. all things being equal, some pretty handy changes there!
--c--
ps: I think Roland nailed it.. all things being equal, some pretty handy changes there!
Last edited:
kb244
Well-known
My co-worker has an old Pen-FT he had for a few years, but he hasn't used it in years because no repair tech in the area, even our illustrius local repairman Peter can't get at the shutter. They could fix it if they could just get at the shutter.Cale Arthur said:
Cale Arthur said:
Yea I got the above in trade for my near-mint condition Yashica Mat-124G and couple rolls of 120 film. He was just as eager to get the yashica so I guess it was a fair trade. I was a tad worried at first because he admited to having never run a roll thru the FT before.
The back of Karl's mirror looks just like the backs of my FT and FV mirrors. The camera doesn't use a pentaprism, but rather a sequence of two prisms and a mirror in between them to bring the image right-way-around for viewing. And it's this internal mirror that's semi-silvered to feed light to the meter. The small rectangular window on the top deck at the rear edge illuminates the viewfinder's meter display (the F and FV don't have this window) Here's a diagram from an FT brochure...
Attachments
Cale Arthur
---- ------
Glad you got to keep the original Pen! That's a beauty.
Somewhat related to one of your original points, and i'm not sure how widely this is known (i found it in the fine print of a Pen FV lens guide), but apparently, if you pull the aperture ring out slightly, it'll disengage and rotate all the way around to show the Oly numbers 'system' on the top of the lens! I can see this being very handy for those w/an F or FV - you can just move the 'numbers' back to the bottom when you want to be able to see the f-stops up top if you have a lens that originally came w/and FT!! ..for me, that little design really sealed the deal on Maitani being utterly brilliant human being.
--c--
Somewhat related to one of your original points, and i'm not sure how widely this is known (i found it in the fine print of a Pen FV lens guide), but apparently, if you pull the aperture ring out slightly, it'll disengage and rotate all the way around to show the Oly numbers 'system' on the top of the lens! I can see this being very handy for those w/an F or FV - you can just move the 'numbers' back to the bottom when you want to be able to see the f-stops up top if you have a lens that originally came w/and FT!! ..for me, that little design really sealed the deal on Maitani being utterly brilliant human being.
--c--
kb244
Well-known
However I assume it is likely that when whoever put in the hot shoe replaced the mirror with maybe one from an F or a custom one so that there was no light loss and so they could just remove the meter cell to put in the hot shoe. I would not know for sure unless I figured a way to take the top off.Doug said:
kb244
Well-known
Speaking of original Pen.Cale Arthur said:
Kinda getting 'cute' I just need an OM-1 then.
Last edited:
Cale Arthur
---- ------
Yep, i was WAY, way off.. my apologies!Doug said: