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!
1. From : William D. Tallman (email@example.com)
Url : http://
Date : 03:05 AM Friday 19 September, 2003
Re: 80-200 zoom. Have Type 1; focuses to 1.6 meters, and I thought it was metal but sometimes one can't tell. Understand this lens is well regarded. When I bought this lens at Keeble and Schucat in Palo Alto CA, the salesman told me it was the last of the good 80-200 zooms that would be available, and that the next lot would be quite a bit cheaper. K&S had a reputation for being "sales oriented", if you will; it appears they were correct in this instance. Thanks again, Bill Tallman2. From : Mico (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Url : http://
Date : 12:09 PM Thursday 18 September, 2003
On 80-200, again: if the lens is NOT marked "M" than it is "K" 80-200/4.5 lens, 100% percents identical to "M".3. From : Mico (email@example.com)
Url : http://
Date : 12:05 PM Thursday 18 September, 2003
William, if your lens focus down to 1.6 meters, it is TYPE 1 M 80-200/4.5 lens. If it can do it down to 1.2 meters, than it is newer, TYPE 2, M 80-200/4.5 lens. Also, there is no trace of plastic on TYPE 1 zoom, while the lens barrel on the later one is mostly plastic-made. Regards, Mico4. From : William D. Tallman (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Url : http://
Date : 12:00 PM Thursday 18 September, 2003
Have older LX, with M series 50mm f/1.4, and 80-200mm f4.5. How can I tell which series the 80-200 lens is? Is there a serial number list, or pictures of each, or a list of specifications unique to each. Google failed me in this.... Thanks, Bill Tallman
5. From : Mico (email@example.com)
Url : http://
Date : 11:59 AM Thursday 18 September, 2003
Jay, you are a living encyclopedia... Thank you for explanation, but I am still wandering about one thing: what Pentax (or any other brand) had in mind by labeling one lens F.4.0 and the other 4.5?Lets put asside the REAL ability of the lens to pass exactly what designer(s) had as a goal, but what they are trying to tell us - what is the difference between 4.0 and 4.5? K-bayonet Takumars are liars anyway, they are at least 1/2 stop slower than labeled, but this is not an issue here. I think that 4.5 , as a number, looks nicer than 4.7 to label 1/2 f-stop difference, since you can find 4.7 mark only on some cheap third-party lenses, and extremely rare on brand lenses. Or, even simpler: is A*300/4.0 1/2 or 1/3 F-stop brighter than F* 300/4.5?
Do not ask about A 70-210 - while I was contemplating "to swap or not to swap" guy did the exchange with somebody else...and the lens was extraordinary, just like taken out from the assembly line. So, I was so angry that I had to find the other one, and I did. I am waiting for delivery, and since I will keep the both lenses,comparable test result will be posted here. M.6. From : J. Hart (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Url : http://
Date : 03:26 AM Wednesday 17 September, 2003
Mico, I forgot to ask, did you do the tele zoom M to A swap, and how does the tradeoff seem in use? --jay7. From : Jay H. (email@example.com)
Url : http://
Date : 03:15 AM Wednesday 17 September, 2003
Mico, Many lenses are marked 4.5 which may actually facilitate lesser or greater light passing on through their front and out their back as is rendered from a scene or subject on the film plane. T stops (for "transmission" stops) are of more literal usage value than theoretical f stops (for "focal length aperture" stops). Unless you are using an optical in line set-up without anything measuring or changing through the lens light values as a result of acting on their signals for that set-up's manipulation--e.g., for light value regulation by such regulators as a camera's shutter speeds, or a lens' aperture setting as indicated by a resident light meter--what difference does it make to you at all? I guess what I am asking is what is behind the question? Different manufacturer's lens coatings, the number of elements in a barrel, the number of air to glass surfaces, the actual achieved focal length, etc.--all these are design factors that add to or take away from the light passage from the front to the back of a lens. These effect actual light transmission capacity of a lens. These modify light capture ability and results in addition to marked f stops as connected to a diaphragm's pupil (representing theoretical fractions of the focal length, as installed, turned sideways to the optical path). These appear for us to adjust as the bottom half of such fractions of the focal length stamped on the aperture ring, as technically presenting in the light path formula from the aperture optical center to the film plane. These are the aperture numbers written down for us, which may or may not indicate the actual light passing through the lens.
As a filmmaker I am more concerned with the actual light that gets to the film, and its accuracy of representation by the aperture ring on a lens, or a real in camera light passage considering electronic readout representation, than I am in the physics or formulas of theoretical optical focal length fractions: like 1/4.5th or 1/5.6th of the focal length (turned perpendicular to the light path, and measured by an aperture opening as being a fraction of the focal length of the lens found placed within the lens' light path).
If you read lens tests, they usually indicate a number of factors, including the measured vs. the actual aperture; the resolution of the glass at given apertures; light falloff to edges or corners, and the focal length as represented and actual. The value of looking at these is to see what your given lens can do. I mentioned getting rid of an M 100 f2.8 portrait lens because the aperture indication was 1/3 of a stop off.
I used to dream of a masking-capable liquid aperture as a new technology for optical design, changed by an electronic or electrical resistance signal (being a perfectly round aperture in a lens), opposed to a mechancial aperture diaphragm, which is never quite perfectly circular. We know that a nine blade aperture excells over a 5 blade aperture as to helping make images sharper, and resulting light in passage to be more precisely controlled as a given and honest aperture value. We know too that an SMC lens coating, or the more refined "ghostless" coating, will help to make a len's theoretical aperture values more accurate. Manufacturers have to deal constantly with design tradeoffs: as to lens size, and the results representing actual aperture values vs. theoretical ones, actual focal lengths vs. what is achieved in the assembly in a barrel, and acceptable light falloff to the edges or corners of a format for a given focal length. I hope all this gobblygook has been helpful to you. --Jay8. From : Mico (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Url : http://
Date : 01:07 AM Wednesday 17 September, 2003
Hi Jorge, You can not remove DOF button, since it is attached to the camera`s front plate from inside. And this is the only piece of hardware that is on your way. Just start removing leatherette cover from the right side (where you hold the camera) toward the bayonet mount. When you get close to the DOF button, just peel the cover all arround it, and pull the DOF button through the hole in it. You have to LIFT the leatherete completely and than slide it toward the top of the DOF button.
Hint when placing new leatherette: first pull the DOF button through the hole, and than put the glue, othervise it is going to be a mess. Best way to put the new cover is to place DOF to 8:45 position (Self-Timer on half)and than slide it toward the bayonet mount. That position gives you the best control over the process. Be aware of two steel covers under the leatherette, one is placed more to the right and the other is covering the gap between camera`s front plate and the aluminium sub-frame. They could get off with the old cover, so put them back in place. Hope this will help. M.9. From : Jorge Nunez (email@example.com)
Url : http://
Date : 01:01 AM Tuesday 16 September, 2003
All, I need to replace the front leatherette of my LX. How do I remove the DOF button ( and other front hardware.) Doing front left and right sides. Also, what solvent can I use to prepare the surface of the body for the new leathertte. Thank you, Jorge10. From : Mico (firstname.lastname@example.org)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
Url : http://
Date : 10:43 AM Monday 15 September, 2003
One theorethical question: what is the real life difference between F4.0 and F4.5 ? It should be 1/3 of the F-stop, but it seems that it is commonly used to mark 1/2 F-stop. According to logarithm, real 1/2 F stop should be 4.7 but few manufacturers use that. I have tried to find that out, at least with Pentax lenses, and I am not sure yet. You can not find that with LX, of course, since it does not display 1/3 f-stop difference, but some modern electronic bodies are dispalying different valyes. Any opinion on that?
Maintainers for Pentax LX Series SLR Camera Models Message Board:
Tony Davies-Patrick (Globetrotter) (email@example.com); Mico Smiljanic (firstname.lastname@example.org);
Jay Hart (email@example.com); Philip Ashman (firstname.lastname@example.org)
| 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
for New/Used photographic equipment
on Pentax LX SLR camera
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.