The Balloon game begins - Pentax K Mount vs Olympus OM Zuiko

CharlesDAMorgan said:
Still no LX back from repairers, but in the mean time a Contax 139Q arrived. Also, the Vario Sonnar I found turned out (according to the excellent West Yorkshire Cameras) to be a little less than excellent optically so didn't want to send it. But the day before they'd had a Distagon 35mm f2.8 and an 85mm Sonnar f2.8 arrive in immaculate condition. So a slight balancing payment and they were dispatched.

The test roll will be developed this afternoon. I like the 139Q, light and compact, although it's a faff to make exposure compensation and the front button rather than a shutter press to check exposure is a departure from my normal ergonomics. We'll see how I get used to it.
Click to expand...

Your De-GASing is an example to us all.

Regards, David
 
The test roll of the Contax 139Q in one pic. On its way back Monday!

loveplymouth2-1-of-1.jpg
 
I have never used Olympus film cameras because I never liked their ergonomics. However, I do use Olympus digital cameras but have been unhappy with their reliability.

I do use Pentax film cameras. I prefer their M42 Takumar lenses over than their K-mount lenses. However, I do not like the ergonomics of the M42 lens mount.

I use Zeiss lenses and Contax film bodies. Love the lenses but afraid to use the bodies because if they break, I will not pay to have them repaired.

If forced to get rid of one system, I would part with the Olympus first.

If forced to keep only one system, I would keep the Pentax because I have been very happy with their handling, reliability, and image quality.

Since no one is forcing me to downsize, I will keep all three. As far as I am concerned, they have found their happy home.
 
Charles, you need the advice of an experienced but one armed camera user (definitely not me) so they can’t say ‘on the other hand’.
Seriously, after looking at the many arguments for and against this or that system, it is really going to rest on your shoulders alone. Your personal preference, your comfort zone.
 
Very true Zuiko85.

I noticed a similar softness to my OM2n with the photos I took with the Contax 139Q. Now no-one has ever suggested Zeiss lenses lack sharpness, so I'm beginning to wonder if the principal problem for me is in the size and weight of the cameras. I've never had sharpness issues with my Leica Ms, and a review of the photos taken with the Pentax LX before it had to be returned for work show crystal clear shots. So I wonder if I'm better suited to a bit more heft in the cameras (my Leica Rs, heavy as they are, have never had a single wobble issue). In the end, as you say, it's all very personal what works or not.

Another test roll went through the 139Q yesterday (not self-loaded) to see what gives with it. Just out of the tank, with no light leaks or obvious scratches - the first was self loaded the second an Ilford loaded Delta. Something clearly went horribly wrong with the self -loading of that reel, which is a first!
 
CharlesDAMorgan said:
Another test roll went through the 139Q yesterday (not self-loaded) to see what gives with it. Just out of the tank, with no light leaks or obvious scratches - the first was self loaded the second an Ilford loaded Delta. Something clearly went horribly wrong with the self -loading of that reel, which is a first!
Click to expand...

Ahhhh, that aberration on the frame posted earlier makes more sense now. I couldn’t figure out how that particular camera could produce that particular defect, short of having a rear door that didn’t fit.
That still leave open the question of what system suits you best.
 
Delta 400 just scanned. I shot it at 125 and gave it 9 minutes in PMK Pyro (trying to reduce the bright skies). No exposure adjustments were made while shooting the Contax, I let it do its thing in AP.

Chalk and cheese from yesterday. I applied myself to shooting the 139 with more care (rather than letting a higher ISO film give me more latitude). No scratches, no lightleaks anywhere, so something wrong with my film loader of late. The Sonnar I knew to be a beauty, the Distagon now showing what it can do. In one leap, this is now the front runner.

Distagon

happyices-1-of-1.jpg


Sonnar

dontpassiton-1-of-1.jpg
 
CharlesDAMorgan said:
Delta 400 just scanned. I shot it at 125 and gave it 9 minutes in PMK Pyro (trying to reduce the bright skies). No exposure adjustments were made while shooting the Contax, I let it do its thing in AP.
Click to expand...
That Delta looks really Smooth.


Olympus OM was the beginning of film photography for me, and through Zuikos the few rolls of Kodachrome I shot in 2009-10 were exposed. So there is a certain attachment to the System for me. That said, the OM1 I used is jammed and sits at my folks home.


I got an MX + 40mm 2.8 from a Xmas giveaway, thanks to forumer ruby.monkey. Nice camera and the LED readout I really like. This 40 f2.8 unit doesn't seem incredibly sharp but it makes for a great coat pocket SLR unit.


At my folks' home, and before I moved countries, the OM-1 was replaced by a Nikon F80, and a F90 afterwards. I'd recommend the Nikon F80 + 50 1.8D as a lightweight and convenient kit. However, the DSLR feel is way beyond these classics, so it may be better for another topic. Tthe F80 died due to salt water exposure, so it is better for risky environments! I keep away the classics off the beach harm.
 
Delta 400 really pulls well, and the grain is much better suppressed.

I like the F80 (I have one and an F90) but I'll leave that vs the Canon EOS5 for another time.

My first SLR system was Olympus as a 17 year old, I remember getting the OM10 for my birthday, and the 50mm f1.8 and 28mm f2.8 I have still are from that time. Still perfect (the merits of a new skylight filter on new lens proven beyond doubt) but the camera has long gone, replaced only recently by a very nice black OM2n. But in the end, my most commonly used lens is a 35mm and the Olympus one is a bit soft.
 
charjohncarter said:
CharlesDAMorgan, those images look great.
Click to expand...

Thank you! So pleased I gave it a second chance. Pulling the delta from 250 at which I normally shoot it with Pyro, and down to 125 with a quarter less developing has brought out everything without the very bright light of yesterday overdoing things.

Lovely lenses.
 
CharlesDAMorgan said:
Delta 400 really pulls well, and the grain is much better suppressed.

I like the F80 (I have one and an F90) but I'll leave that vs the Canon EOS5 for another time.

My first SLR system was Olympus as a 17 year old, I remember getting the OM10 for my birthday, and the 50mm f1.8 and 28mm f2.8 I have still are from that time. Still perfect (the merits of a new skylight filter on new lens proven beyond doubt) but the camera has long gone, replaced only recently by a very nice black OM2n. But in the end, my most commonly used lens is a 35mm and the Olympus one is a bit soft.
Click to expand...

Feel free to start a Canon vs Nikon thread on those midrange AF SLRs :D

OM wise I had the "Lower end" 28mm 3.5 and 50mm 1.8 MiJ, which both were stellar performers. I always wanted a 50 1.4 for available light (Kodachrome and slow slide film) but never, and to this day, have owned a 50mm f1.4 on any of the systems I keep. I've read that the Pentax K's 28mm f3.5 is highly regarded.

Another curious coincidence is that my Fuji 6x9 has the shutter and aperture settings in a ring, which matches the approach of the Olympuses.

The ilford Deltas are fantastic. I use Delta 100 although I might have to do some testing as it's contrasty in HC110 box speed, maybe some downrating to be done. I've gotten some D400 for 35mm, but have most extensively shot HP5 in Medium format.
 
It's funny, the lenses I most love are the Summicron f2s of all stripes. The truly fast primes are very much miss with me - I just cannot nail focus except with my 80mm f1.4 Summilux, and that I put down to the marvellous Leicaflex SL2 focussing screen.

I alternate a lot between Delta and HP5 - ultimately the latter wins 90% of the time, but the Delta has a bite to it at 400 and lower that the HP5 lacks.
 
Charles, is the top photo recent? It looks like it could be recent or from the 1960's. It always blows my mind seeing people not wearing masks. But sometimes I see pictures and I realize it was shots someone must have taken 8 months ago.

CharlesDAMorgan said:
Delta 400 just scanned. I shot it at 125 and gave it 9 minutes in PMK Pyro (trying to reduce the bright skies). No exposure adjustments were made while shooting the Contax, I let it do its thing in AP.

Chalk and cheese from yesterday. I applied myself to shooting the 139 with more care (rather than letting a higher ISO film give me more latitude). No scratches, no lightleaks anywhere, so something wrong with my film loader of late. The Sonnar I knew to be a beauty, the Distagon now showing what it can do. In one leap, this is now the front runner.

Distagon

happyices-1-of-1.jpg
Click to expand...
 
CharlesDAMorgan said:
Just yesterday. They were all keeping the mandated distance and you only need to wear a mask inside stores in the UK.
Click to expand...

This is going to sound negative, but that picture certainly doesn't look like a safe situation to me, even if people are technically following the rules.

They started requiring masks outdoors where I live, and we are on the very lowest side of cases in the US. I hope it stays that way.
 
Gentle hint - I'd prefer to keep on topic about the camera systems than get into a Covid discussion please.

I think I'll treat the Olympus 35mm f2.8 to some Delta and like developing to eliminate that variable. But the Zeiss Distagon is up there.

customs-house-1-of-1.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom