Photographs Through a 13 year old eye. My kid got a hold of the camera.

[Barbarian]

t's my understanding that pentax was bought out by ricoh

Has been, but so far, Ricoh has wisely let Ashahi Optical (for whatever their current name is) continue as they are. Pentax had formerly been bought out by Hoya, which sold them to Ricoh. Pentax DSLRs are well-regarded for being high quality at a much lower price than Nikon or Canon. My K-3 actually has better image quality than Nikons or Canons costing hundreds of dollars more.

And the DSLRs and the K-01 can use all the old Pentax Takumar primes which are better than most DSLR lenses to day. You need a small adapter, and you have to focus them yourself, but if quality matters, then that's the way to go:

Taken with a 36-year-old f 2.5 135mm Takumar.

 

[Barbarian]

My nest film units were Exacta VX IIs from East Germany. They were tough to purchase except one went into East Berlin for that purpose. There were every bit as good as Nikon but about one quarter of the cost.

In the day, (just post WWII) they were more costly than Nikons. And they are still not hard to find. The VX II models go for... (Barbarian checks)

Whoa! Up to about $300 for a body, no lens. In 2005 McKeown's had them for about 50-75 dollars, no lens. I should have gotten more of them, When I had the chance.

They are very well-made, and beautiful cameras:

Notice the "left-handed" arrangement for the rewind lever. You held the lens and focused with the right hand, and wound with the left.

The quality of lenses was variable, but you could, in the 60s, get glass for them that rivaled the best consumer lenses today. Almost all of them were better than the kit lenses that come with Nikons and Canons today, except for the lens coatings. There was also a lower-cost line, the Exa, which where smaller and simpler.

Later, you could also use lenses made for the Japanese Topcon, the RE series, not the later ones. Topcons were every bit as good as the top-of-the-line Nikon F series.

Pentax and Ricoh are both very reliable and considerably cheaper than Nikon.

Yep. Tough, reliable, and the prime lenses were generally better than Nikon or Canon.

 

[jasonc]

My first camera was a pentax k 1000.

 

[th1b.taylor]

My first camera was a pentax k 1000.

My first was a Fixed Focus Kodak Box Camera but when I learned to work in the Lab, I took some incredible pics with it. Simple cameras teach people to pay attention to content and in my opinion, content is king in Camera Work. Working with that Box Camera taught me a great deal about paying attention to what is complimenting to and what is distracting from the subject matter.

 

[Barbarian]

My first camera was a pentax k 1000.

Super rugged, super quality. One of the all-time classics.

 

[GodsGrace]

There's places to.teach her .dlsr are not simply point and shoot.I'm still learning mine .

Do you mean .dslr ?

 

[th1b.taylor]

Do you mean .dslr ?

I believe he meant DSLR. He can correct me if I'm wrong. The only reason I would spend that much today would be for a small amount of Micro and some Macro Photography. The Industry has advance to far to waste money buying the equipment I once thought a requirement. My current point and shoot cost about $150 and has a four power Mechanical Zoom and a twelve power Software zoom built into the Camera. Technology has just zoomed ahead!

 

[GodsGrace]

I believe he meant DSLR. He can correct me if I'm wrong. The only reason I would spend that much today would be for a small amount of Micro and some Macro Photography. The Industry has advance to far to waste money buying the equipment I once thought a requirement. My current point and shoot cost about $150 and has a four power Mechanical Zoom and a twelve power Software zoom built into the Camera. Technology has just zoomed ahead!

Yes, of course that's what he means. Single Lens Reflex.
I also have purchased a digital camera and paid it about $90.
It's just fine since I don't really take pictures anymore.
My 3 SLR's and equipment are collecting dust.
I'd hand the stuff down, but everybody has purchased their own.
And not everyone is interested in all this stuff.

Wondering

 

[jasonc]

Im not into photographing people.land scape etc

 

[Barbarian]

Yes, of course that's what he means. Single Lens Reflex.
I also have purchased a digital camera and paid it about $90.
It's just fine since I don't really take pictures anymore.
My 3 SLR's and equipment are collecting dust.
I'd hand the stuff down, but everybody has purchased their own.
And not everyone is interested in all this stuff.

Wondering

If you have quality old film SLRs, there are people who would pay you for them. I rarely shoot film anymore, but still love my old Nikons and Leica.

http://cameracollector.proboards.com/

 

[GodsGrace]

If you have quality old film SLRs, there are people who would pay you for them. I rarely shoot film anymore, but still love my old Nikons and Leica.

http://cameracollector.proboards.com/

Thanks Barb.
It's a thought. All three are Minolta's. My favorite one is the oldest, from the
late 70's, I think. Why I ever bought the others, I'll never know.
No particular love for the Nikon, but I would have loved to try out an
old Leica back then.
Thanks again.

Wondering

 

[Barbarian]

No particular love for the Nikon, but I would have loved to try out an
old Leica back then.

The cool thing about the old Leicas is that they were unbelievably simple. Instead of complexity, Leica went for simplicity and really, really skilled technicians tuning each camera to perfection. I have a beautiful old IIIa, which if the factory number data is correct, was made the summer that Hitler invaded Poland.

Not a particularly rare one, but I love it.

I actually prefer the more complicated Zeiss Contax II;

Better lenses. And I used mine, so it mattered. The old Nikon rangefinders used the Contax mount, but they weren't entirely interchangable, whereas the rangefinder Canons used the Leica mount, and those were interchangable.

 

[Barbarian]

Then there's the odd one:

A Voigtlander Prominent, with an f 1.5 50mm Nokton lens. I bought the camera to use the lens, which I found in a pawn shop junk drawer. It's worth more than the camera. If it was one of the rare ones with a Leica thread, it would be worth thousands. A big heavy tank of a camera.

 

[LovethroughDove]

I ended up getting her this, just because it is an instant photo she can post to her social media. I looked into the DSLR cameras and the one that she would like was about $400. If she keeps the interest in snapping photos, we may splurge.

 

[GodsGrace]

Has been, but so far, Ricoh has wisely let Ashahi Optical (for whatever their current name is) continue as they are. Pentax had formerly been bought out by Hoya, which sold them to Ricoh. Pentax DSLRs are well-regarded for being high quality at a much lower price than Nikon or Canon. My K-3 actually has better image quality than Nikons or Canons costing hundreds of dollars more.

And the DSLRs and the K-01 can use all the old Pentax Takumar primes which are better than most DSLR lenses to day. You need a small adapter, and you have to focus them yourself, but if quality matters, then that's the way to go:

Taken with a 36-year-old f 2.5 135mm Takumar.

Barb,
You took this shot?
It's stupendous.

How about this...
Forget about politics
Stick to photography.

Just kidding.
We'd all miss you.
Who would we argue with??
LOL

Wondering

 

[jasonc]

A dlsr is capable of WiFi ,mine is i just don't use it.I have taken mine to work and whiLe working photo graphed .I have a special one for AirDancer of big blue from a great distance.I don't think my boss wants to know I read and snap photos.plenty of walking and time in between homes.I took this while at the final stretch of a long route.I head west at this homeView attachment 10819 s home. View attachment 10819

 

[Barbarian]

Barb,
You took this shot?
It's stupendous.

Yep. I had to take a class to a Medieval Jousting facility, and I took the camera along. Mostly, it's the ancient 2.5 135mm Takumar. Those old primes are better than almost anything you can get today.

How about this...
Forget about politics
Stick to photography.

I need the aggravation. Sorry.

Just kidding.
We'd all miss you.
Who would we argue with??
LOL

I don't mind arguing. And it's nice to have people who can argue and not get angry. I like that.

 

[LovethroughDove]

A dlsr is capable of WiFi ,mine is i just don't use it.I have taken mine to work and whiLe working photo graphed .I have a special one for AirDancer of big blue from a great distance.I don't think my boss wants to know I read and snap photos.plenty of walking and time in between homes.I took this while at the final stretch of a long route.I head west at this home

One of the capabilities the camera needed was instant uploading to the internet. Is that what yours does?

 

[jasonc]

One of the capabilities the camera needed was instant uploading to the internet. Is that what yours does?

Yes it can.

 

[Barbarian]

Almost all digital cameras can be loaded on a computer with a USB cord. But WiFi connection is nice to have. There are also SD cards that can provide WiFi connection if the camera does not:
http://techpp.com/2015/04/28/wifi-sd-cards-camera/

I have one, but I find that I rarely use it. It's just not something that fits my workflow. Still, they are handy if you want to quickly share your work.