PEntax LX 250 Bulk Film Back.jpg (17k)

Modern Classic SLRs Series :
Pentax LX - Message Board/Guestbook

Industry wide indications and ceasing film body development by Pentax altogether in early 2003 more than suggest the manual focus Pentax LX will not be having an upgrade (except, perhaps for very rare Limited Edition Models hand assembled by special commission by the new HoyaPentax Corporation). In 2008 Pentax became a division of Hoya Corporation, which had together with Pentax released jointly developed professional grade optics (since 2005); Pentax has shifted its attention to development of auto focus Digital SLRs having build qualities constructed for the long run--now with weather seals--like the LX. You may use this site for common support and sharing of mutual users knowledge or experiences among yourselves. You may also use this message board as a guestbook for the advanced users Pentax SLR cameras from the LX forward, including many such auto focus film cameras, and Pentax digital SLR cameras. We keep the site going too for the WORD SEARCH FEATURE found here as to its magnificent K mount system user archives: as have been shared here for many years. Have an inquiry related to Pentax gear? First try KEYING IN YOUR KEY WORD(S) for a preexisting archived response on your subject of inquiry from this LX site. If your inquiry or sharing is from advanced users K10D, K20D, or K200D SLR needs, proceed on to t NEW PENTAX ADVANCED USERS K10D, K20D SLR site.

This LX site was specifically created for the great Pentax LX SLR camera model(s), and now has incorporated increased opportunity for an expanded interchange with the introductions of the Pentax K10D, K20D, and K200D SLRs to include advanced and professional digital user models. Interchange is encouraged with the intention to continue as a forum for advanced system users of past K-mount film based SLR systems and the mentioned Pentax DSLRs. With decreasing forum traffic here, and enthusiasts moving on with SLR digital imaging products futures, we hope the continued convenience of this site and its past Pentax advanced LX users data archives--provided by the database KEY WORD SEARCH FEATURE found here--can be very useful to you. Most past site user techniques, systems components, and lenses of Pentax advanced applications--as have been past examined by users on this site--are still of use regarding the newest Pentax SLRs. Please don't mail us with other than constructive suggestions or to rectify mistakes found within this site, thank you. Since this is a non-profitable resource site, maintained by professional and advanced system users, the developer of this site reserves the rights to censor or delete any inappropriate, unrelated, misleading or excessively hostile messages posted herein. If your intention is to dispose of your Pentax cameras or its accompanying accessories and/or you are looking for a used model, or even for any of its system components: please use a separate section with a higher volume of related traffic for these purposes: on the
Free Trade Zone site instead. The Photography In Malaysia sites sponsor has no Guestbook standing on its own, because it is an integral part of the MIR site. But if you want to leave a note on your experience of visiting our site and its service, you may use the MIR's Guestbook found at another new window by clicking on the Guestbook Link.

Add a Posting to the Message Board
A kind reminder: Please do not misuse of this message board system.

Main Index Page of Pentax LX SLR Website

The respective Message Boards are some of the HARDEST hit sections of the PIM served sites; if, at any one time, the traffic is high--the table of contents or individual pages may take a while to load your input data, or our's. So, just be patient. If your interaction stalls, just click on the 'Reload' or 'Refresh' button on your browser menu once to re-attempt interaction here. Thank you. Welcome to MIR!

Search keyword(s)(Case Sensitive) within :
     

 



1. From : J. Hart (ibcom@onebox.com)
Url : http://
Date : 07:37 PM Friday 06 February, 2004

AB, Fuji does make a portrait specific slide film. Also, because of a forgiving latitude it does stand to reason to use negative film for most portraits, weddings, etc. A 400 iso emulsion in particular is very forgiving in these situations. But, virtually all magazine photographers, fashion, sports, and the like use transparency film because of reproduction quality, discussed briefly by me below. If I had a portrait studio, serving a local market, color negative film would make perfect sense for that use--perhaps your own use? --Jay


2. From : AB (handmaid@fsmail.net)
Url : http://
Date : 07:09 PM Friday 06 February, 2004

I understand what you're saying Jay, but there just doesn't seem to be the choice in transparency film. With print film there's a choice of any number of portrait films, three or four different 400's from Kodak, same from Fuji, a similar number of 100's and 160's, some 800's, a number of chromogenic B&W's designed for portrait yet I'm not aware of one portrait specific slide film. I guess it's a subject thing, I rarely do still life or landscape, maybe this is where slide shines and maybe medium format. Certainly I didn't find squinting at a 35mm slide a very rewarding experience. Anybody use slide for portraits? AB


3. From : J. Hart (ibcom@onebox.com)
Url : http://
Date : 06:42 PM Friday 06 February, 2004

Why slide film? Why go for "the film look"? Transparencies exceed negative emulsions for rendering: far superior grain structure, much superior and subtle handling of color detail, an artistic color ambience, and address the demand for proper and precise scenic exposure capture. On the other hand, there is less exposure latitude, and the compression, generally, of shadow detail. It gets down to going for the film look: audiences are used to the professional rendering of motion picture film (where transparency stock came from in the first place). In building and handling image banks, it is far easier to handle one media than two (print plus negative vs. a quick and easy look at the complete rendering on an editor's light table). I'd suggest shooting a challenging compositional scene, say an English garden, which has many details and colors available, with both film types--then compare the difference. It is always transparency film which has superior scenic rendering "life", with snap to colors and light so far lacking in negative emulsions. Further, photopaper itself limits what is reproduceable. It helps add life to negatives to scan them, like slides, for direct reproduction. Part of the "film look" is the way transparencies compress tones further than all other emulsions but B and W negative film, adding snap and pushing into the available viewing perspective a lighting presence negative color emulsions supress. Negative emulsions, like some digital renders, are "flatter". Also, most negatives come out of processing saturated with fixer, which is a death sentence on full and available emulsion life for building an image bank which can retain saleability for some greater years as slides. But, with the tendency the past twenty years away from Kodachrome, toward the postery slide emulsions with "extra color", one has to store such in darkness, for exposure to light actually begins a slow and tedious bleaching of the dyes exposed in E6 processing--but with far less loss over time than those fixer and other chemical saturated negatives (with negatives whether kept apart from exposure to light, or not so kept). There is too the palette available from chosing between various slide emulsions as to type, grain affect, and speed. The lure of photography, i.e., why we love using it, and admire its results, grows with the mastery of the media, available from slide films application. Its use becomes like using a favorate lens for its unique color and perspective qualities, and for subjective preferences. Every time I shoot negative emulsions--excepting B and W--I always am disappointed with how the scene and light are rendered, and go back to slides. Publishers use slides, and digital originations, because of the art factor of rendering, longevity of image banks as built up, and all of the above. Plus, on transparencies is enough data to go for limited or very complete reproduction--that data detail is just not all on the color negative emulsions, like it or not. --Jay


4. From : AB (handmaid@fsmail.net)
Url : http://
Date : 04:54 PM Friday 06 February, 2004

Ian, do you get our drift????? Okay let's ditch the winder thing - oh, by the way I just got a winder for my MX, complete with battery catch. Sweet. Why does everybody go on about slide film? I've only used it twice. Once it was some out of date tungsten balanced film from Jessops (the only mouldy tungsten film they had in store), I used it in an LX to photograph my friends' paintings at an exhibition under tungsten lighting. The second time it was Velvia in the 67, another batch of her paintings this time I set them up outside under overcast (and rapidly failing) light. I used slide because she said that publishers prefer it. Personally I like a nice print in my hands. I'm not overly worried by grain and film characteristics - in fact as digital encroaches I find myself appreciating them more - and if I want exquisite quality I'm realising more and more that the addictive 67 blows 35mm out of the water - CD's are so tiny that I don't think quality is an issue anyway. So come on transparency users, I'm open to conversion. AB


5. From : Mico (micolx@netscape.net)
Url : http://
Date : 02:08 PM Friday 06 February, 2004

Hi Ian,I am a bit late (was shooting in freezing cold, again!)for the winder subject, but it is never too late for such things... DO NOT OPEN it, even if you get your urge again. There is nothing inside you can lubricate, beside rewind shaft, which is totally irelevant for winder operation. Lubricant used is an ultra long life special white grease. And the rest of the gears inside are in fact dry. Very precise piece of machinery which do not need any special maintenance. And no,it does not open from the top... M.


6. From : Ian (ian@ity.co.uk)
Url : http://
Date : 10:32 AM Friday 06 February, 2004

Anton, yeah, It's difficult with album covers (mono vs. colour). Just a thought - my emergency fallback when I need "character" with colour is Kodachrome 64. Personally I wouldn't go near C-41 for an album cover. Maybe E100G, if you need fast processing (E-6). With CD covers (not 12x12 vinyl), I suggest a more graphical style to the shot, impact - contrast. Do plenty of mock-up's and view from 3-4ft (ink-jet, steel rule and scapel, CD jewel case etc). Merely suggestions, nothing more. - Ian.


7. From : J Hart (ibcom@onebox.com)
Url : http://
Date : 02:38 AM Friday 06 February, 2004

Sounds like a need has presented to add lighting to the subject. This means too a psychological barrier on so communicatively asserting the introduction of portable lighting into the scene where needed is to be crossed. Why not tell the singer your own scenic needs to get the job done, and do so? You can light for mood using cutouts. If not flash because of its distracting vocal interuptus, then tungsten ambient light may loosen up the scene for your needs and her. --Jay


8. From : AB (handmaid@fsmail.net)
Url : http://
Date : 05:02 PM Thursday 05 February, 2004

Thanks for the enquiry, Ian. The whole business was not photographically satisfactory really.

The 3200 just proved too slow resulting in the danger of shake, even with a monopod. The monopod proved a pain in the **** trying to position myself in a cramped environment. I was using fast primes and I'd see a shot on one direction and need the 85, then I'd turn round and there was a shot half a metre from my face needing a 24. On top of that I had to keep putting the whole shebang down to pay attention to my main task; concentrating on the singer. The film lingers in the camera with only 12 exposures made

The next day I used Tri-X, the 35-105, my 24 and the AF280T with Stofen Omnibounce on a hotshoe grip; set the LX to Auto This was much better - I like what I've seen of the Tri-X and I'm going to use it in the 67 on a semi-nude figure shoot (that's the model, not me). Reports in the current Photography Monthly (they've run a black & white film test) are very favourable regarding the new film - I've come away with some usable studio shots and details that might pad out the inside of the album cover but there's nothing I'm proud of. The main problem was trying to do two jobs that require concentration at once. Anyroad I'm down for doing the cover shoot, she likes black and white but feels it has to be colour to get noticed, I think she may be right. I'm wondering about Fuji NPZ800 (which I love) in the 67 or a film I've been impressed with is Agfa Ultra 100 this is one of those saturated film but skin tones are surprisingly good and reds just knock your head off and the whole thing has a slightly unreal quality. I might try this in the LX with flash and go for a fashion look. Infact..... I'll probably use both cameras and both films, why not? That's what we're about no? AB


9. From : ian (ian@ity.co.uk)
Url : http://
Date : 09:51 AM Thursday 05 February, 2004

If your in the West Midlands (UK), Jessops 295 (Merry Hill, not the one in the mall) has a half price sale on used gear. Sadly much of it has gone (to me, lol). But I noticed they had some Pentax stuff left (i.e ME-Super with 50/1.7 for £60). Globetrotter? - Ian.


10. From : Ian (ian@ity.co.uk)
Url : http://
Date : 07:14 AM Thursday 05 February, 2004

Ok, so I won't be able to vacuum for a week, I'll find them. I'm sure most of them will be white nylon cogs anyway. Easy to see. Anyway Anton, just exactly where are those T-Max 3200 shots? Seriously though, I hope the shoot went well for you. - Ian.


PAGE | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 | 150 | 151 | 152 | 153 | 154 | 155 | 156 | 157 | 158 | 159 | 160 | 161 | 162 | 163 | 164 | 165 | 166 | 167 | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | 172 | 173 | 174 | 175 | 176 | 177 | 178 | 179 | 180 | 181 | 182 | 183 | 184 | 185 | 186 | 187 | 188 | 189 | 190 | 191 | 192 | 193 | 194 | 195 | 196 | 197 | 198 | 199 | 200 | 201 | 202 | 203 | 204 | 205 | 206 | 207 | 208 | 209 | 210 | 211 | 212 | 213 | 214 | 215 | 216 | 217




Maintainers for Pentax LX Series SLR Camera Models Message Board:
Tony Davies-Patrick (Globetrotter) (globetrotterworld@hotmail.com); Mico Smiljanic (micolx@netscape.net);
Jay Hart (ibcom@onebox.com); Philip Ashman (genesisphil@hotmail.com)

| Post a Message to the Message Board |

Archived Messages of Previous Postings
001-050 | 051-100 | 101-150 | 151-200

Back to Main Index Page of
Pentax LX SLR Camera Website


Back to Message Board of
Pentax LX
SLR Camera

Disposing/Looking
for New/Used photographic equipment

on Pentax LX SLR camera


Administrator Page

Home - Photography in Malaysia

Copyright © 2007. leofoo @. MIR Web Development Team.
Version three Re-Programmed by our in-house Fairuz Sulaiman, improved from original version by Ang Seng Leong ,Yeak Ngai Siew, Rizal Yahya, Halimaton Yahya (Members of the MIR Web Development Team)

MIR Guestbook On-line. Developed & Copyright@ 2001 by MIR Communications Sdn. Bhd.