agentlossing
Well-known
It's Rainier from the south (Paradise inside the national park).
Mt. Rainier is good for the soul. It's a fantastic place.
agentlossing
Well-known
It's not a sight you readily forget!
rx7photog
Newbie
The rest of the story: I had been waiting patiently for a K 85 f/1.8, when it (the K) appeared at KEH a few weeks ago. I jumped on it immediately! And then, a couple of days later, before the K had arrived, the A* showed up on Robert's. I jumped on this one, too, thinking I would decide which 85 to keep after I had lived with both for a while.
When it rains ...
ETA: About the 35 f/2: I began with a Spotmatic F and a few SMC Takumar lenses when I was a college sophomore. I quickly sold that "system" and purchased a K2 and a few K lenses. A couple of years later, ca. 1977, when I began road biking a lot, I sold off the K2 and lenses (except for the 35 f/2 pictured and a 105 f/2.8, which I still own, also) and purchased the used Rollei 35 S also pictured. A few of years ago (2016?), my interest in 35mm SLR photography reignited, and I purchased the MX from KEH.
rx7photog
Last edited:
agentlossing
Well-known
Zuiko-logist
Well-known
Beautiful
agentlossing
Well-known
Thank you!
agentlossing
Well-known
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
Spotmatic II and Super Takumar 55f/2
Ilford HP5 in HC110
Ilford HP5 in HC110
agentlossing
Well-known
I just switched out the focusing screen which came with my black MX for the one that was in a beat-up silver MX I was given a couple of years ago. The silver MX stopped working reliably, but I appreciated the SG type focus screen that was in it more than the SC-1 split-image one in the black MX. The SG feels cleaner and faster to focus, maybe because I allow myself to judge focus a little more loosely with the center matte circle than I do with the split image. The latter seems to bring out some inner OCD and I miss shots when I can't see the split image clearly enough.
Zuiko-logist
Well-known
This screen is normally for architecture but also useful for file of thirds composition.
Cascadilla
Well-known
When I shot MX bodies in the 1980's and 90's I used these screens in all 4 of them for the reasons you mentioned. I used to shoot a lot of slides of paintings and the grid screen was very helpful in making sure that the camera was lined up correctly. When I bought my first MX I made more focusing errors in the first week than I had made in the previous year. I had been used to working with 16 mm movie cameras which had plain ground glass screens and I found the split image in the middle of the screen distracting and not functional for me. When I moved on to Pentax LX bodies in the 90's after wearing out the MX's I also installed grid screens in the 4 LX bodies that I owned.
AAlfano
Well-known
Interesting information regarding focusing screens. I've noticed recently that I seem to wind up with more "almost but not quite" in focus shots with my cameras that have split-image focusing screens than I do with my Pentax cameras that have plain microprisms.
Cascadilla
Well-known
My previous Yashica TL-Electro-X SLR had a micro prism and that had worked well for me. If it had had a bayonet lens mount and open aperture metering I might not have switched to Pentax when I did. The split image focusing aid in SLRs never worked as well as an actual rangefinder in a Leica or Contax for me. Everybody's different, so I'm sure that a lot of photographers found that they worked well for them since they remained popular for a long time.
agentlossing
Well-known
I'm the same way. The split image is a very accurate focusing aid if you have all kinds of time and bright edges on your subject, but if you're out walking around, I find that I frequently can't attain focus without a lot of fiddling. It makes me try to rely on the prism in the ring around the outer edge of the split image, and that's where I end up with focusing errors.
AAlfano
Well-known
I once had an OM-1 that had a non-standard focusing screen. (I believe the standard was split-image and this one didn't have that.) It was a microprism but very "coarse," if that makes sense. That worked better for me than any other focusing screen I've tried; however, the camera needed service and I decided I'd rather concentrate on Pentax and Nikon and not invest too much in another system, so I sold it.
elmarman
Bail out the Brits too !
Well in 1961 I was working in Breda Studios Barking Essex ( England) using a CONTAX III Bought in Berlin Germany in 1957 for £38 -- a FORTUNE when I was a British Soldier -- but I got into trouble cutting the top off the Mayor's HEAD due to the terrible small Viewfinder. One of the Partners had been in the RAF in SINGAPORE and brought back 2 'weird cameras called 'ASAHI PENTAX S and K ' with weird lenses called 'TAKUMARS' BUT they beat my Zeiss Contax Sonnar 50mm f1.5 uncoated lens ! One day I saw a small group of Camera -Starved Brits with their Noses glued to the window of a local Camera Dealers -- so I rushed over to see and in the window in Pride of Place was one only ASAHI PENTAX S3 + 55mm f1.8 'Auto-Takumar' !!!! PRICE : £ 87 !! So I rushed in -offered the CONTAX in part exchange and Rushed out the Proud Owner of an ASAHI PENTAX ! and that is how the Story began ---- many years later I SOLD that S3 for £25 to a Bloke I knew in a Singles Club -- then even MORE YEARS LATER he contacted me " That Camera you sold me no longer works -- would you like it back ? " -- So he brought round the 1961 S3 -- I had a look -- the film wind was all stiff -- so I took off the Baseplate with my JIS Screwdrivers and Oiled with a MINUTE AMOUNT the Cogs and levers -- then tried the film wind and it CREAKED INTO ACTION - and the SHUTTER Worked -- and has been working ever since -- My ORIGINAL 1961 ASAHI PENTAX S3 back Home !
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
Great story -- 60 years on and it's still going strong. Glad you have it back, and it looks great!
Zuiko-logist
Well-known
Amazing condition. Lovely camera and lens.
