Good morning, Pete;

Well, depending on how you define "and their M42 predecessors," (in a limited way or in a broader sense), it could go back all the way to 1949 and the Zeiss Ikon Contax-S. Then again, that is not really all that long, when you think about it. That was only about 15 years later when the Asahi/Heiland/Honeywell Pentax SpotMatic came out.

Pete, if the photograph was taken with a Pentax or a similar body, and especially with the Takumar lenses, then people will probably like to see them. The thing that has always had me wondering about, is that requirement that after we take that photograph with our camera, and then have the film processed, at that point we need to convert the photograph from its pure simple original natural form, into a digital format which can be sent over the Internet to APUG so that others can see what we did. This still feels counter-intuitive to me. A real contradiction.

Enjoy;

Ralph
Latte Land, Washington

Good morning, Pete;

Yes, sir. Your observation about the actual source equipment used is valid. And, if anyone has bothered to check, it is possible to see that I am not a member of any of the Leica fora that are out there, simply because I do not have an Ernst Leitz Leica camera. I do think that for me, I should have a sample model of at least one in their range if I say that I would like to join a group for that marque. Yes, it is a personal thing that I do apply to me, but I am not comfortable with a "wannabe" status when applied to me. However, I have always liked the Leica M4, and I have actually thought about purchasing a Leica IIIf or Leica IIIg, just so that I could say that, yes, I do have one, and could then authoritatively comment on and compare all of my other equipment here with the Leica. I do have in stock both Fed and Zorki copies and "modifications" of the early Leica cameras, but that is not yet enough. Yet, even at the current prices for a Leica film camera, it still would have been cheaper to have bought one of them, and also much easier to store one of them, than all of the many other camera samples from my own major interests in various other marques.

Then there is also the point of my interest in the history of 35mm film cameras, and how that "miniature" film format came to become the major film format of choice in various countries around the world. I know that the argus C3 was the major force in making 35mm film popular here in the United States. The combination of the Sanei Sankyo Samoca-35 plus the Shinano Koki Pigeon-35 together did that in Japan. I think that something like the LOMO Smena-8M did that in Russia, but I have no definitive information to confirm that yet.

Then to show what it can take to make one of the more obscure parts of a camera popular, such as the lens mounting system, it was the Asahi Pentax 35mm SLR camera that made the M42 screw thread mount truly popular here in the United States, to the point that the "M42" 42mm diameter by 1.0mm thread pitch lens mount became known here as the "Pentax mount." Yes, this is the same one that was introduced by Ziess Ikon with their Contax-S back in 1949 when it was first produced, but it had been designed back in the late 1930s and World War II prevented it from being produced and introduced at that time. The "M42" or "Pentax Mount" was adopted by so many other camera makers that it also acquired the nickname of the "UTM" or Universal Thread Mount. It was that simple and popular. and the Asahi Pentax was what did that here in the United States. And the M42 mount probably has more names and labels than any other camera lens mount.

Enjoy;

Ralph
Latte Land, Washington