From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007/02/15 Thu AM 04:19:24 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting systemissuperior
to K mounting system?
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: Well
mike wilson wrote:
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007/02/15 Thu AM 04:19:24 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting
systemissuperior
to K mounting system?
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
You didn't scratch up the lens mount trying to get the bayonet lined
up,
like with the K-mount, instead you simply cross-threaded the lens.
Before Pentax buggered up the lens release, and took the dits off the
lenses, there was never an excuse to mis mount a K mount lens.
Buggered up the
The extra time taken to screw on an m42 vs the speed of the K-mount
bayonet fitting provides more time to consider the shot?
8)
John
The information transmitted is intended only
Hmm... but Bill indicated that the K mount was better before they
buggered it up... I don't think K mount has ever had the release on
the other side, has it? At least none of my bodies do (admittedly I
don't have a K series, only M and later)
Nope, all on the same side, I find the earlier
On 2/15/07, Peter Loveday [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You didn't scratch up the lens mount trying to get the bayonet lined
up,
like with the K-mount, instead you simply cross-threaded the lens.
Before Pentax buggered up the lens release, and took the dits off the
lenses, there was never
From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007/02/15 Thu AM 10:00:26 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting systemissuperior
to K mounting system?
mike wilson wrote:
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date
Peter Loveday wrote:
You didn't scratch up the lens mount trying to get the bayonet lined
up,
like with the K-mount, instead you simply cross-threaded the lens.
Before Pentax buggered up the lens release, and took the dits off the
lenses, there was never an excuse to mis mount a K mount
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:47:21 +1030, Peter Loveday wrote:
Hmm... but Bill indicated that the K mount was better before they buggered
it up... I don't think K mount has ever had the release on the other side,
has it? At least none of my bodies do (admittedly I don't have a K series,
only M and
I suppose it depends on what you're used to. I've always had K-mount cameras
(Pentax and Ricoh) and developed a quick lens release system using the
forefinger of the left hand to press the release while twisting the lens with
the right hand.
When I recently bought a Minolta 7000 (for
The release is badly located. With the more typical location on the
other side of the mount(like Nikon and Canon EF) you can, with a little
practice, operate the release with the same hand that grips the lens as
you remove it. Makes for really quick lens swaps. The release location
is my one
- Original Message -
From: mike wilson
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42
screwmountingsystemissuperior to K mounting system?
Buggered up the lens release? I find the lenses more difficult to take
off the DSLR than the film cameras but haven't been able to, er, put
Cory Papenfuss wrote:
The release is badly located. With the more typical location on the
other side of the mount(like Nikon and Canon EF) you can, with a little
practice, operate the release with the same hand that grips the lens as
you remove it. Makes for really quick lens swaps. The
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007/02/15 Thu PM 02:12:40 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42
screwmountingsystemissuperior to K mounting system?
- Original Message -
From: mike wilson
Subject
On 15/2/07, Adam Maas, discombobulated, unleashed:
The release is badly located. With the more typical location on the
other side of the mount(like Nikon and Canon EF) you can, with a little
practice, operate the release with the same hand that grips the lens as
you remove it. Makes for really
Cotty wrote:
On 15/2/07, Adam Maas, discombobulated, unleashed:
The release is badly located. With the more typical location on the
other side of the mount(like Nikon and Canon EF) you can, with a little
practice, operate the release with the same hand that grips the lens as
you remove
A few years down the line, and I find it
more intuitive.
Contradiction in terms!
--
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Cotty
Sent: 15 February 2007 18:17
To: pentax list
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42
On 15/2/07, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed:
A few years down the line, and I find it
more intuitive.
Contradiction in terms!
Point taken.
Less intuitive?
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
AM 04:19:24 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting
systemissuperior
to K mounting system?
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting
systemissuperior
Well,
Anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting system
is/was superior to the bayonet K mounting system?
I know at least two, and maybe somebody else knows
some more?
jco
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 15/02/07, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well,
Anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting system
is/was superior to the bayonet K mounting system?
I know at least two, and maybe somebody else knows
some more?
The extra time taken to screw on an m42 vs the speed of the K-mount
anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting system
issuperior to K mounting system?
On 15/02/07, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well,
Anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting system
is/was superior to the bayonet K mounting system?
I know at least two, and maybe somebody else
Nope.
And I don't care either.
Cheers,
Dave
At 10:03 AM 15/02/2007, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Well,
Anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting system
is/was superior to the bayonet K mounting system?
I know at least two, and maybe somebody else knows
some more?
jco
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
At 10:07 AM 15/02/2007, Digital Image Studio wrote:
On 15/02/07, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well,
Anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting system
is/was superior to the bayonet K mounting system?
I know at least two, and maybe somebody else knows
some more
On 15/02/07, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well,
Anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting system
is/was superior to the bayonet K mounting system?
I know at least two, and maybe somebody else knows
some more?
The extra time taken to screw on an m42 vs
. ANYBODY ELSE?
Dont anybody mistake these threads for soft fine filter
threads, M42 lens threads are built for the job.
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Tom C
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 8:25 PM
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re
All the lenses with an a/m switch have depth of field preview?
Dave
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Well,
Anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting system
is/was superior to the bayonet K mounting system?
I know at least two, and maybe somebody else knows
some more?
jco
--
PDML
: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 9:17 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting system
issuperior to K mounting system?
All the lenses with an a/m switch have depth of field preview?
Dave
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
Well,
Anybody know in what ways
While it may be possible to cross thread an M42 lens it's damned
difficult. I've tried, but never succeeded. One of my many failings I
guess, sob.
Tom C wrote:
On 15/02/07, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well,
Anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting system
- Original Message -
From: Digital Image Studio
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting system
issuperior to K mounting system?
The extra time taken to screw on an m42 vs the speed of the K-mount
bayonet fitting provides more time to consider the shot
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting
systemissuperior to K mounting system?
You didn't scratch up the lens mount trying to get the bayonet lined up,
like with the K-mount, instead you simply cross-threaded the lens.
Before
anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting
systemissuperiorto K mounting system?
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: Well anybody know in what ways m42 screwmounting
systemissuperior to K mounting system?
You didn't scratch up the lens mount trying to get the bayonet lined
M42 prices just continue to rise rise. Due to good adaptability to many
DSLRS I would guess. This is the lens I raved about a few years
ago but I only paid $99 for mine. Im not so enthusiastic at this kind of
price.
Look at this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=160048284565
Super lens. I lusted for one of these back in the seventies. I think
there's a K-mount version as well.
Paul
On Nov 11, 2006, at 9:51 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
M42 prices just continue to rise rise. Due to good adaptability to
many
DSLRS I would guess. This is the lens I raved about
My shameless listing for a lens for sale.
Pentax 300mm f/4 Manual M42 thread. It comes with a K mount adapter and a
Ricoh KR-5 III body that works fine except the light meter is off by about a
stop and the cable release threads are stripped.
I am asking somewhere around 130.00 for the lens
Via eBay, that is.
http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZdpconsult.comQQhtZ-1
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose
-- Jim Elliott
At 12:09 PM 12/03/2006 , you wrote:
Via eBay, that is.
http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZdpconsult.comQQhtZ-1
I think that 105mm is one of the prettiest lenses ever built. Have no need
for it, but it sure would look nice on the front of my SP1000.
Powell
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Mishka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 18. januar 2006 03:24
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: new Zeiss m42 lenses!
http://tinyurl.com/8fuh5
best,
mishka
--
Dr E D F Williams
___
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
http
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 18. januar 2006 01:34
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: did you realize it? - zeiss with m42 mount
danilo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
from here:
http://www.zeiss.com/de/photo/home_e.nsf
This is my favorite bit:
Nokia Carl Zeiss
A Cooperation to set new benchmarks
To me the interesting stuff:
Yes, the lenses will come from Cosina.
Three other interesting points. They said Zeiss will set up its own
distribution companies rather than going through existing ones. They
said that the lenses will be priced comparably with similar Nikon
lenses. And
Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And they said that some new lenses will be coming that were
never available in Contax mount. Two that are shown are a 60mm f/2
Makro-Planar and a 28mm f/2 Distagon. I think this will be the first
true macro lens with an f/2 aperture.
The Olympus OM
]
Sendt: 18. januar 2006 03:24
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: new Zeiss m42 lenses!
http://tinyurl.com/8fuh5
best,
mishka
Really well. I've noted a few times on here that I preferred using M42
lenses to K/M lenses on the D. With M42 lenses you got aperture priority
as well as HyperManual.
-Adam
Jens Bladt wrote:
This makes it even more usefull to have Pentax DSLR's that allows for off-A
full aperture metering
danilo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
from here:
http://www.zeiss.com/de/photo/home_e.nsf
This is my favorite bit:
Nokia Carl Zeiss
A Cooperation to set new benchmarks for picture quality in mobile
phones
Woo hoo! A Zeiss lens for my phone camera!
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
http://tinyurl.com/8fuh5
best,
mishka
crave the
optical characteristics of this lens line and are willing to get along
without the convenience functions of recent lenses.
bye
danilo
Interesting, especially since F mount is the only major mount that can't
take M42 lenses.
The 85/1.4 is looking interesting, if it comes in around
I save this mail for when I will understand it!
thank you all for your advices.
Danilo.
On 1/5/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 4, 2006, at 4:24 AM, Jostein wrote:
If you plan to use the lens without reversal, you should pick a
macro lens. The
macro lenses can cope
, but you have to either work out the correct exposure or use a
dedicated TTL flash unit.
Godfrey
On Jan 3, 2006, at 2:24 PM, danilo wrote:
Hi all,
reading about the m42 to EOS converter, I thought I'd like to give
it a try.
I was thinking to buy a macro lens, or maybe
On Jan 4, 2006, at 4:24 AM, Jostein wrote:
If you plan to use the lens without reversal, you should pick a
macro lens. The
macro lenses can cope with a lot of extension without significant
quality
deterioration.
It's not altogether necessary to reverse mount a lens to get good
results.
Hi all,
reading about the m42 to EOS converter, I thought I'd like to give it a try.
I was thinking to buy a macro lens, or maybe a bellow.
what do you think about the takumar 50/4 macro lens?
What lens do you think is better amongst the takumar line concerning
macro? (keeping an eye on the price
, danilo wrote:
Hi all,
reading about the m42 to EOS converter, I thought I'd like to give
it a try.
I was thinking to buy a macro lens, or maybe a bellow.
what do you think about the takumar 50/4 macro lens?
What lens do you think is better amongst the takumar line concerning
macro? (keeping
On 1/1/06, Don Sanderson, discombobulated, unleashed:
Pretty simple to make K lenses act like that.
Just remove, permanently or temporarily, the
aperture actuator lever. Voila', stop down Av!
I've done this to an M50/1.4, works fine.
Har, another soul who's 'had the op' ;-)))
Cheers,
to me a couple weeks ago to put a screw mount lens on
my *ist film body. Can anyo usene else say aperture priority? Feel
free to point at me and laugh. I suddenly feel a multiple M42 lens
enablement coming on.
The sad part, and this was mentioned very recently in another thread
I'd have to say it's exactly the opposite on the DSLR's. The M42's are
easier to use than the K/M lenses, unless you're shooting wide open.
Although you still need to use the DoF preview/green button to meter in
manual with the M42's.
-Adam
John Forbes wrote:
Agreed. K and M lenses
Not only do you still need the green button, but you have to attach an
adapter as well. K and M lenses are much easier to use on the DSLR
cameras. Adapter = pain in the butt.
Paul
On Jan 2, 2006, at 1:50 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
I'd have to say it's exactly the opposite on the DSLR's. The M42's
At 02:48 PM 1/2/2006, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Not only do you still need the green button, but you have to attach an
adapter as well. K and M lenses are much easier to use on the DSLR
cameras. Adapter = pain in the butt.
Paul
I've never used a screw-mount adapter. If you have multiple
Glen,
I've just joined the list, and coincidently this is something I've been going
through myself
recently.
There are two adaptors that are the most common -
M42 and T2
Basically these are just metal rings that allow you to connect older lenses to
modern cameras.
(But by doing so you might
Actually, only one adapter is needed. It attaches to the camera body and
stays there unless you decide to remove it. There's a clip that holds it
securely to the K-mount. Then the lenses just screw in and out. NBD, imo.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Glen
I've never used a screw-mount
On 2 Jan 2006 at 15:10, Glen wrote:
I've never used a screw-mount adapter. If you have multiple screw-mount
lenses do you buy an adapter for each one, or do most people use a single
adapter and keep switching them between screw-mount lenses?
Assuming the screw-mount adapter stays on the
the opposite on the DSLR's. The M42's are
easier to use than the K/M lenses, unless you're shooting wide open.
Although you still need to use the DoF preview/green button to meter in
manual with the M42's.
-Adam
--
Scott Loveless
http://www.twosixteen.com
--
You have to hold the button down -Arnold
The adapter stays on the camera. It's impossible to remove the
adapter until you have unscrewed the lens.
On 1/2/06, Glen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've never used a screw-mount adapter. If you have multiple screw-mount
lenses do you buy an adapter for each one, or do most people use a single
are not A compatible.
jco
-Original Message-
From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 7:18 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: M42 lenses on *ist bodies, or, I'm an idiot
On 2 Jan 2006 at 15:10, Glen wrote:
I've never used a screw-mount adapter. If you have
On Jan 1, 2006, at 2:16 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
It just occurred to me a couple weeks ago to put a screw mount lens on
my *ist film body. Can anyone else say aperture priority? Feel
free to point at me and laugh. I suddenly feel a multiple M42 lens
enablement coming on.
Can't say as I'd
button the setting
stays put until _I_ tell it otherwise, I like that.
Don
-Original Message-
From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 7:21 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: M42 lenses on *ist bodies, or, I'm an idiot
that's interesting
On Dec 31, 2005, at 10:38 AM, Don Sanderson wrote:
Anyone know the register on Canon and Minolta bodies???
vvbg
http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mounts.htm
Godfrey
Don,
I dunno what you're looking at, but I owned and worked with Nikon FM/
FE2 cameras for 20 years.
The FM2/FE2 have interchangeable focusing screens that are 1 stop
brighter than the FM, and the FM is on par with the MX as far as my
eye can tell, both for brightness and for
On Dec 31, 2005, at 11:48 AM, Don Sanderson wrote:
I would venture a guess that you get a good bit of pleasure
out of adapting some of those beautiful enlarging lenses to
M42, mounting them on an M42 bellows, adapting that to K to
fit on a nice KX and taking beautiful images to help sell
On Jan 1, 2006, at 5:37 AM, Don Sanderson wrote:
I have the Nikon FM and don't find the viewfinder anywhere near
as bright as the MX.
This may just be my copy, the prism shows very faint seperation
lines so is undoubtedly not at its best.
You have a bad prism and you could fit a brighter
On Jan 1, 2006, at 1:53 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
... And it's a lot cheaper to get an MX than an F.
My buddy in Reno, NV, just bought a Nikon F Photomic FTn head with
five Nikkor lenses, all in *mint* condition, for $340. He had the FTn
head overhauled for $50 more. Works perfectly,
, January 02, 2006 8:15 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Nikon lens on M42 body???
On Jan 1, 2006, at 5:37 AM, Don Sanderson wrote:
I have the Nikon FM and don't find the viewfinder anywhere near
as bright as the MX.
This may just be my copy, the prism shows very faint
: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 9:03 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: M42 lenses on *ist bodies, or, I'm an idiot
I'm more of a Green Button Advocate than apologist.
Even if full K compatibility was added I'd still use
the green button as I do
I don't think pentax ever made a SLR that had K/M aperture priority AE
without some sort of AE lock or at least AE compensation to go along with
it...
I agree that it's pretty rare (and that it's pretty limiting, too), but I
do think that the MG, the MV, and the MV1 all had AE with no lock and
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 10:01 PM
To: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: Re: M42 lenses on *ist bodies, or, I'm an idiot
I don't think pentax ever made a SLR that had K/M aperture priority AE
without some sort of AE lock or at least AE compensation to go along
with it...
I agree
in the butt factor comes into play. Can anyone explain this a bit
better for me?
thanks,
Glen
I tend to leave the adaptor on the camera much of the time, although it
does stay on the 50/1.4 Super-Tak when I want to pull it off the camera.
And I shoot in Av with the M42 lenses. Which severely
Rotate the lens/adaptor combo 1/3 further to remove. Note this trick
ONLY works on the cameras that lack the aperture simulator (It will
badly break cameras that have the aperture simulator if tried).
-Adam
Scott Loveless wrote:
The adapter stays on the camera. It's impossible to remove
, as I get a lot more use out of the 50/1.4 than the
135/2.8 I also own in M42 mount.
-Adam
Rob Studdert wrote:
One adaptor per camera body in use with a screw lens is required. Whilst it's
recommended to mount the adaptor to the screw lens then mount the assembly on
the K body when removing
-
From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 7:21 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: M42 lenses on *ist bodies, or, I'm an idiot
that's interesting, your in complete opposition to the green button
apologists who insist it's easy and not a big deal
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert
Subject: Re: M42 lenses on *ist bodies, or, I'm an idiot
If you wished to fix a screw adaptor on each of your screw lenses you'd
need to
remove the adaptor locking flange and fabricate a locking pin hole on each
lens
assembly that mimics
On 2 Jan 2006 at 20:21, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
that's interesting, your in complete opposition to the green button
apologists who insist it's easy and not a big deal. What I want
is a higher model that supports all kmount lenses fully.
That would be nice feature, especially when you consider
explain this a bit
better for me?
thanks,
Glen
I tend to leave the adaptor on the camera much of the time, although
it does stay on the 50/1.4 Super-Tak when I want to pull it off the
camera. And I shoot in Av with the M42 lenses. Which severely cuts
down on the annoyance factor, dropping
One could always leave the M42 lens on manual
mode, and just rotate the aperture ring open to
focus and then closed to shoot. anywhere in between
would still give correct exposure. Still kludgy
in my mind but would be OK for rarely used lenses
not worth buying in the A mount all over again
jco
On 2 Jan 2006 at 21:32, William Robb wrote:
I did a locking adaptor on my 17mm Fishy Tak.
I don't know if all the Taks are built thusly, but I took the lock spring
off an adaptor, then used the screw to lock the adaptor to the lens, marked
the back of the lens where the lock pin would be
the adaptor on the camera much of the time, although
it does stay on the 50/1.4 Super-Tak when I want to pull it off the
camera. And I shoot in Av with the M42 lenses. Which severely cuts
down on the annoyance factor, dropping it much below K/M lenses.
-Adam
Flipping the auto/manual switch, pressing the green button, six of one
Compared to using K/M lenses on the *ist (once again, film body), the
M42s are heaven. If the *ist had an aperture simulator or something
similar to the green button I'd definitely use the non-A lenses. Fact
is,
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 2 Jan 2006 at 20:21, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
that's interesting, your in complete opposition to the green button
apologists who insist it's easy and not a big deal. What I want
is a higher model that supports all kmount lenses fully.
That would be nice feature,
If Pentax is trying to move on from supporting obsolete lenses, or if
they're trying to force me to upgrade to newer lenses, they have
succeeded only in encouraging me to buy even older lenses. g
Har !!!
Fred
-Original Message-
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 8:15 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Nikon lens on M42 body???
On Jan 1, 2006, at 5:37 AM, Don Sanderson wrote:
I have the Nikon FM and don't find the viewfinder
preference. I hate using
M42 lenses on K bodies, I always prefer M42 bodies for M42 lenses just to
get
the auto aperture feature which dates back to about 1960.
jco
-Original Message-
From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 10:57 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Godfrey, the Nikon FM has 93% coverage and .86x magnification, which is
distinctly inferior to the MX's 97% coverage and .95x magnification
(which is actually more coverage and as much or more magnification than
any non-F body from Nikon, the closest for coverage being the F100 at
96% [albeit
-Original Message-
From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 11:09 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Nikon lens on M42 body???
Godfrey, the Nikon FM has 93% coverage and .86x magnification, which is
distinctly inferior to the MX's 97% coverage
function. That's a tough call. I really don't know if I would
rather have stop-down AE or GB hypermanual but retaining auto aperture
which the GB function and K/M lenses give you. I honesty think
GB with auto aperture would be my preference. I hate using
M42 lenses on K bodies, I always prefer M42
Let's think in practical terms, ok?
Between 93% and 97% coverage viewfinder with 35mm format, the
difference amounts to somewhere around 1.5mm more format coverage on
the long axis, less than that on the short axis. If you can really
see that and find it significant in hand-held field
On 31/12/05, Perry Pellechia, discombobulated, unleashed:
ORF is a new one for me. Just googled it and the best I can come up with is:
http://www.apd.rdg.ac.uk/AgEcon/livestockdisease/sheep/orf.htm
I'm orf as in oi mate I'm orf out of here, too bleedin noisy.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
||
On 31/12/05, Don Sanderson, discombobulated, unleashed:
I'm going to try Nikon glass on a Pentax body Cotty.
A K mount ring and a spacer should do it.
I'll start with a cheap lens though, I value my NIKKOR-P
105/2.5 (100% mint) rather highly. ;-)
That's the spirit! The only problem on the
On 31 Dec 2005 at 22:10, William Robb wrote:
I've used many Nikons over the years; F, F2s, F3 HP, FM, FM2, FE, and a
Nikkormat FTN (technically not a Nikon).
I have handled, but not used extensively the FA and F4, and some of the
lower end cameras from the mid 80s, the N2000 and N2020, the
.
(Now where's my Dremel?) ;-)
Don
-Original Message-
From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 8:04 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Nikon lens on M42 body???
On 31 Dec 2005 at 22:10, William Robb wrote:
I've used many Nikons over
- Original Message -
From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: RE: Nikon lens on M42 body???
The context of the discussion/posts was limited to the viewfinders.
We werent comparing the cameras as a whole...What surprised me was
the contention that Nikon didn't have any viewfinders as good
Bill, what do you mean by 'more accurate'?
Focus, framing, or both?
Don
-Original Message-
From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 9:16 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Nikon lens on M42 body???
- Original Message
Mike set me straight on this. Amazing what one learns here
On 1/1/06, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31/12/05, Perry Pellechia, discombobulated, unleashed:
ORF is a new one for me. Just googled it and the best I can come up with is:
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell
Subject: RE: Nikon lens on M42 body???
The context of the discussion/posts was limited to the viewfinders.
We werent comparing the cameras as a whole...What surprised me was
the contention that Nikon didn't have any
401 - 500 of 1105 matches
Mail list logo
