Okay. I'll join in here, but will leave out the cameras before the first Pentax. If I were to include them it would take several pages, there are at least forty of them.
In April 1982 my family and I were preparing to leave SA for good. We'd finally had enough of the government and Apartheid. I took some equipment to a dealer in Cape Town. There was an Arriflex, a Nagra recorder, microphones, a projector and other stuff. I told them what I wanted for the lot and that I would not bargain. While the manager and a couple of others were discussing the matter, my wife and I wandered around the showroom. We saw a couple of new Pentax ME Supers in a showcase. I examined one and found it rather nice. So after I'd got the cheque for my stuff I bought the little camera, with a 50mm f1.7 SMC M, and a few rolls of film. All my other equipment was by that time in a container on the Atlantic heading for Helsinki. I took some pictures on the way but then didn't use the little camera for years. A few winters ago someone asked me to take pictures of sledge dog racing. I went along with my Alpa and the mirror stuck up. It was cool, around -20C. That did it. I went home and got the Pentax. That seemed to work until I saw the results - under-exposed. The camera had been lying around for so long the contacts, that everyone knows so much about, had to be cleaned. I did that and went back a week later. Then it worked. I sold the Alpa on eBay, with all it's lenses, for an enormous sum. It didn't break my heart. I had been enslaved to Alpa for 30 years. A famous Swiss camera that doesn't like the cold? Ridiculous isn't it? The next one was a used P30 I happened to see in shop window in Jyväskylä, by chance, about two years ago. I went in and bought it - with a Takumar Zoom. A week later I saw a Vivitar 135mm/F3.5. I did a bit of checking and decided it was good. I bought it. Finally I saw, on eBay, new in the box, a P30T and bought that. I got more (new) lenses on eBay. The Pentaxes are reliable, work in the cold (-32C so far) and don't break down. I do have a Bronica SQ-A as well and it's the best 6x6 I've ever used. But honestly I don't give a black baboons backside who makes the cameras I use as long as they do what I need. These ones do. They are simple and reliable. I like the ME for it's 1/2000 shutter speed (long telephoto shots) but otherwise it's the two other simple cameras I use. I suppose I like simplicty from my many years of experience with Alpa. If a camera does not annoy you. If you have confidence that its going to do the job. If you can focus accurately. If the shutter works properly and the film advances in a solid body without trouble. If it feels comfortable in your hands ... and you don't have to fumble for controls ... its okay. The lenses are the vital part of the system. Find the lens you want to use then get a camera to which it can be attached. By the way there is a lens I would like to have. It's not made by Pentax. When I buy it I'll need a body to fit. It won't be Pentax unless there is an adapter, or one can be made. Of course some jobs can be done better with an Auto Focussing system. Others benefit from TTL measurement, motor drives, sophisticated exposure measurment - LX and the newer bodies ... ad infinitum. Don Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 ----- Original Message ----- From: "wendy beard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 5:36 AM Subject: Re: Orgin Myths > At 15:22 9-9-2002 -0400, you wrote: > >Seriously, it's much more interesting to hear why people made a > >*conscious* decision to use one or another kind of > >equipment (as oposed to having inherited it). > >But I was wrong in my initial judgement -- seems like lots of people here > >did make that choice, and I saw some very > >good reasons. > > > >Now if only someone from Pentax marketing were listening... > > > >Best, > >Mishka > > I didn't inherit any camera equipment. Nor was I given any Pentax stuff as > a present by anyone. > I reckon Pentax marketing had a lot to do with my decision. > I started out into "serious" photography with a second-hand Zenit-E. I sold > it and then progressed(!) to a Praktica MTL3. Around 1981, the equipment > bug bit and I started buying Amateur Photographer to look through the > adverts (I certainly didn't buy it for any other of the content - if I > recall, a better title might have been "amateur pornographer"). > At the time, Pentax products were flavour of the month with the editorial > team and nearly all the camera shops advertizing their wares had a good > stock of Pentax gear. Reviews of the MX and ME-Super were glowing, they > were the smallest around and even better - they were affordable! > I duly sent off my cheque to the advertizer with the best price and a few > days later was the proud owner of an MX with 50/1.7 lens. As I didn't like > to be like everyone else, I decided that my standard lens should be the > 35/f2.8 which I purchased, along with the 135/3.5. About a year later, I > bought the 75-150 zoom. > That was my kit until the late 90s. > I took a foray into the world of Minolta for my AF outfit. Pentax were > nowhere to been seen, and what there was available in the shops near to > where I was living wasn't awe-inspiring. > Then came the MZ-S > (anyone want to buy a Minolta dynax 600si classic?) > > Wendy > > --- > Wendy Beard > Ottawa, Canada > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > home page http://www.beard-redfern.com >
