Porst 55mm f1.2 and K-mount body recommendation

[Lucius]

While I keep hoping to luck out on an m42 55mm f1.2 Tomioka, I've got myself a K-mount Porst with a (messed-up) aperture control. I fixed (sort of) the aperture (basically I removed the auto stop-down, so it's now fully manual -- no big deal as I intend to use it fully open anyway), and I now wonder what's the best way to play with it. I've considered converting it to m42, but I'm not sure (having taken off the mount and looked inside) I can do it successfully and in a reversible way. I've only been able to attach the m42 mount from a T2 converter on top of the K-mount, but that way it doesn't focus beyond about 40cm (usable perhaps, but ideally I'd like to have at least a metre or two). I still haven't decided on getting myself a Sony A7. Though I do try to limit myself to the m42 mount, I think I might make an exception in this case, and get a K-mount body specifically for this lens, and this is where I'd appreciate some recommendations. I do in fact have a ME Super, but it has an m42 adapter stuck in it. I guess the easiest thing to do would be to find a way to remove it, but then I do want to use it with m42 lenses (putting it in and out would be fiddly), and also I'm not sure I like it very much, it seems a bit too small (I realise the two points contradict each other, but bear with me). So I'd be interested in exploring a different, perhaps non-Pentax, body, with aperture-priority auto-exposure (?) and a high maximum speed (to be able to shoot the lens at f1.2). Or should I give up on a high maximum speed (how high would it have to be on a bright sunny day, even with ISO 50 film?), and just use an ND filter? If the latter, I'd appreciate recommendations as to what kind to get and how to use it. Your thoughts and advice please!

 

[removedacct3]

I suggest a Pentax MX as it has a huge and bright viewfinder that is beneficial for critical focusing.

 

[Tomwlkr]

While I keep hoping to luck out on an m42 55mm f1.2 Tomioka, I've got myself a K-mount Porst with a (messed-up) aperture control. I fixed (sort of) the aperture (basically I removed the auto stop-down, so it's now fully manual -- no big deal as I intend to use it fully open anyway), and I now wonder what's the best way to play with it. I've considered converting it to m42, but I'm not sure (having taken off the mount and looked inside) I can do it successfully and in a reversible way. I've only been able to attach the m42 mount from a T2 converter on top of the K-mount, but that way it doesn't focus beyond about 40cm (usable perhaps, but ideally I'd like to have at least a metre or two). I still haven't decided on getting myself a Sony A7. Though I do try to limit myself to the m42 mount, I think I might make an exception in this case, and get a K-mount body specifically for this lens, and this is where I'd appreciate some recommendations. I do in fact have a ME Super, but it has an m42 adapter stuck in it. I guess the easiest thing to do would be to find a way to remove it, but then I do want to use it with m42 lenses (putting it in and out would be fiddly), and also I'm not sure I like it very much, it seems a bit too small (I realise the two points contradict each other, but bear with me). So I'd be interested in exploring a different, perhaps non-Pentax, body, with aperture-priority auto-exposure (?) and a high maximum speed (to be able to shoot the lens at f1.2). Or should I give up on a high maximum speed (how high would it have to be on a bright sunny day, even with ISO 50 film?), and just use an ND filter? If the latter, I'd appreciate recommendations as to what kind to get and how to use it. Your thoughts and advice please!

Highly recom mend Ricoh XR2, takes all Pentax and Ricoh K mount lens with manual or aperture automation, XE2S also can match to a winder I believe

 

[Tomwlkr]

I presently have a Pentax 50mm F1.4 on mine

 

[Lucius]

I suggest a Pentax MX as it has a huge and bright viewfinder that is beneficial for critical focusing.

Thanks! But it's about the same as ME, only mechanical no?

 

[Lucius]

Highly recom mend Ricoh XR2, takes all Pentax and Ricoh K mount lens with manual or aperture automation, XE2S also can match to a winder I believe

Will put it on my list, thanks!

 

[removedacct3]

Thanks! But it's about the same as ME, only mechanical no?

No, I do not think so. Have a look at this thread as it gives some insights into the MX internals. Too bad David turned his back to photrio!

The Pentax MX prism

Through the years I have oftentimes changed prisms on SLRs due to dirt or fungus that I could not remove with solvents. One such SLR that I attempted a while ago was the Pentax MX. I got the top cover off but, to my rather amazement, that prism's bottom was slightly curved! I had never before...

www.photrio.com

 

[Lucius]

No, I do not think so. Have a look at this thread as it gives some insights into the MX internals. Too bad David turned his back to photrio!

Hm, interesting. So is the MX's viewfinder that much better than the ME's (which already seems more than adequate)?

 

[Les Sarile]

Hm, interesting. So is the MX's viewfinder that much better than the ME's (which already seems more than adequate)?

The MX viewfinder has a coverage of 95% and magnification of 0.97X while the ME Super is 92% and 0.95X. Both are great for achieving critical focus quickly handheld.
Since your auto stopdown is not functional, I would recommend the Pentax LX because it takes a final meter reading after you fire the shutter in aperture priority mode. It also has a 1/2000 max shutter for that extra stop in case you're in the bright sunlight. Although the LX is the size of typical compact SLR, it features the most comprehensive interchangeable viewfinder system with most having built-in diopter adjustment.

 

[choiliefan]

Great thing about a K-mount body is the ability to use a 42-screw adapter when applicable.

 

[Lucius]

Great thing about a K-mount body is the ability to use a 42-screw adapter when applicable.

That's actually an eye-opener, thanks! I've managed to take the m42 adapter out of my ME Super, so I can use it now with the Porst.

 

[Lucius]

The MX viewfinder has a coverage of 95% and magnification of 0.97X while the ME Super is 92% and 0.95X. Both are great for achieving critical focus quickly handheld.
Since your auto stopdown is not functional, I would recommend the Pentax LX because it takes a final meter reading after you fire the shutter in aperture priority mode. It also has a 1/2000 max shutter for that extra stop in case you're in the bright sunlight. Although the LX is the size of typical compact SLR, it features the most comprehensive interchangeable viewfinder system with most having built-in diopter adjustment.

I was after all able to free my ME Super from the m42 adapter, so I think I'll try the Porst with it first. It too has a 1/2000 max speed, but I suspect it may not be enough in bright sunlight, at f1.2, though I guess some overexposure shouldn't be a problem. I wonder if a polariser might take up a stop or two?

 

[Huub]

I was after all able to free my ME Super from the m42 adapter, so I think I'll try the Porst with it first. It too has a 1/2000 max speed, but I suspect it may not be enough in bright sunlight, at f1.2, though I guess some overexposure shouldn't be a problem. I wonder if a polariser might take up a stop or two?

Slow film, a polariser or a neutral density filter will all help to keep shutter speeds down.

And most negative films can do with quite a bit of over-exposure. In bright sunlicht contrasts are usually pretty high. When you work in B&W over-exposing and underdeveloping the film will lead to negatives that are easier to print. Typically over-expose by a stop and reduce development by 30% is a good starting point.

 

[Les Sarile]

I was after all able to free my ME Super from the m42 adapter, so I think I'll try the Porst with it first. It too has a 1/2000 max speed, but I suspect it may not be enough in bright sunlight, at f1.2, though I guess some overexposure shouldn't be a problem. I wonder if a polariser might take up a stop or two?

I've heard of the adapter getting stuck. Was it a Pentax branded one or other? I've used one to mount/unmount my Asahi Fisheye onto my ME Super without incident.

ME Super+Takumar Fisheye by Les DMess, on Flickr


If you're going to use most any color negative or b&w film, 1 - 2 and much more overexposure is well within they're overexposure tolerance. Below I tested Kodak Portra 400 and just kept advancing my shutter speed until I've overexposed the film by 10 stops. With a little post work, I can still make use of it .

Kodak Portra 400 overexposure by Les DMess, on Flickr

This comes in handy when you come up to a scene and the meter recommends a setting but you need something different. Like this slowly trickling waterfall and the meter recommended 1/60 but I needed 2 seconds to get the desired effect. Knowing that Fuji 100 color negative can handle this amount of overexposure, I took the shot and the resulting image didn't require much - if any, post work.

Fuji 100-26-26B by Les DMess, on Flickr

I was lucky that there was hardly a breeze so the motion in the foliage was very minimal.

 

[Lucius]

Slow film, a polariser or a neutral density filter will all help to keep shutter speeds down.

And most negative films can do with quite a bit of over-exposure. In bright sunlicht contrasts are usually pretty high. When you work in B&W over-exposing and underdeveloping the film will lead to negatives that are easier to print. Typically over-expose by a stop and reduce development by 30% is a good starting point.

I thought I had a polariser, but it's 58mm (need 55). I guess I'll have to get an ND filter after all.

My go-to film is Kodak cinema ISO 50 film, I suspect it may not be slow enough...

 

[Lucius]

I've heard of the adapter getting stuck. Was it a Pentax branded one or other? I've used one to mount/unmount my Asahi Fisheye onto my ME Super without incident.

ME Super+Takumar Fisheye by Les DMess, on Flickr


If you're going to use most any color negative or b&w film, 1 - 2 and much more overexposure is well within they're overexposure tolerance. Below I tested Kodak Portra 400 and just kept advancing my shutter speed until I've overexposed the film by 10 stops. With a little post work, I can still make use of it .

Kodak Portra 400 overexposure by Les DMess, on Flickr

This comes in handy when you come up to a scene and the meter recommends a setting but you need something different. Like this slowly trickling waterfall and the meter recommended 1/60 but I needed 2 seconds to get the desired effect. Knowing that Fuji 100 color negative can handle this amount of overexposure, I took the shot and the resulting image didn't require much - if any, post work.

Fuji 100-26-26B by Les DMess, on Flickr

I was lucky that there was hardly a breeze so the motion in the foliage was very minimal.

I remember this test of yours -- quite impressive for Portra! My go-to film is Kodak Vision3 50D, until I run out (I bulk-rolled some 200 feet of it), but I suspect cine film typically has less exposure latitude?

My adapter looks original, I just didn't know how to take it out. I managed to remove it following choiliefan's instructions, but it is rather fiddly.

 

[Huub]

I thought I had a polariser, but it's 58mm (need 55). I guess I'll have to get an ND filter after all.

My go-to film is Kodak cinema ISO 50 film, I suspect it may not be slow enough...

A step-up ring 55 > 58mm will do the trick and will be way cheaper then a dedicated 3-stop ND filter. And do yourself a favour and get a good shade too. These super fast lenses are known to be flare sensitive, especially when used wide open.

 

[Les Sarile]

I remember this test of yours -- quite impressive for Portra! My go-to film is Kodak Vision3 50D, until I run out (I bulk-rolled some 200 feet of it), but I suspect cine film typically has less exposure latitude?

My adapter looks original, I just didn't know how to take it out. I managed to remove it following choiliefan's instructions, but it is rather fiddly.

I've never tried VISION3 50D Color Negative Film but according to Kodak, "Create pristine film imagery with the unrivaled highlight latitude". Of course you will have to try it yourself to see how much of that can be used in your own workflow since you have a bit of it. Sounds like a good film for me to try out too.

BTW, I tried Kodak TriX with my Minolta XK + f1.2 wide open during daylight hours and if I remember correctly, I only had to go maybe 4 or 5 stops overexposure with it's 1/2000 highest shutter speed. Not a problem with that film either.

 

[MattKing]

I've never tried VISION3 50D Color Negative Film but according to Kodak, "Create pristine film imagery with the unrivaled highlight latitude". Of course you will have to try it yourself to see how much of that can be used in your own workflow since you have a bit of it. Sounds like a good film for me to try out too.

It is probably important to remember that that description applies to using the film with ECN-2 processing optimized for lower contrast negatives than the target contrast for C-41 films and C-41 developing optimized for RA-4 printing.

 

[Les Sarile]

It is probably important to remember that that description applies to using the film with ECN-2 processing optimized for lower contrast negatives than the target contrast for C-41 films and C-41 developing optimized for RA-4 printing.

Thanks! Good to know as I was not previously aware of this.

 

[Lucius]

A step-up ring 55 > 58mm will do the trick and will be way cheaper then a dedicated 3-stop ND filter. And do yourself a favour and get a good shade too. These super fast lenses are known to be flare sensitive, especially when used wide open.

Thanks, a step-ring does seem to be the sensible solution!

 

[Lucius]

I've never tried VISION3 50D Color Negative Film but according to Kodak, "Create pristine film imagery with the unrivaled highlight latitude". Of course you will have to try it yourself to see how much of that can be used in your own workflow since you have a bit of it. Sounds like a good film for me to try out too.

Thanks, good to know! Will give it try tomorrow, if I make it to Kew.

It is probably important to remember that that description applies to using the film with ECN-2 processing optimized for lower contrast negatives than the target contrast for C-41 films and C-41 developing optimized for RA-4 printing.

Interesting! My lab seems to use proper ECN-2 chemistry, but their prices have just gone up considerably, and others do seem to use C-41.

 

[Lucius]

A quick update: I've finally tested the Porst on a 1/2000 capable Chinon body with 50D film. Most shots didn't get to be overexposed, and those that did shouldn't be overexposed by much. Need to have the film developed and then to scan it.