What's gone wrong?

[Bill Burk]

Wow this sure took a funny route to solve. I think it is a shutter curtain issue and that the camera would work “just fine” at lower shutter speeds.

How did the idea you need tape all around get all the attention? Doesn’t look like light leak to me.

Good luck with the new one, you probably didn’t have to buy it but I get sometimes you want a reliable camera.

 

[Paul Manuell]

Wow this sure took a funny route to solve. I think it is a shutter curtain issue and that the camera would work “just fine” at lower shutter speeds.

How did the idea you need tape all around get all the attention? Doesn’t look like light leak to me.

Good luck with the new one, you probably didn’t have to buy it but I get sometimes you want a reliable camera.

Yeah, someone else suggested the tape, but there really wasn't an easy way to do that cos it's not a clear, flat surface all the way round the camera back.
I agree with you about it being a shutter curtain issue though, despite all the posts suggesting otherwise. I just feel the 'leak' is too even and in the exact same place every time, even after having the seals replaced, for it to be that. Unfortunately I couldn't find anyone in the UK willing to take the work on, not even Pentax themselves, so buying a new body was the only sensible route for me.

 

[abruzzi]

The light leak theory came from the image in post 69 where the dark bar extends all the way across the film including the rebate. I’m curious how a shutter can do that?

 

[Paul Manuell]

The light leak theory came from the image in post 69 where the dark bar extends all the way across the film including the rebate. I’m curious how a shutter can do that?

Yeah, but how come I've had the same 'leak' in exactly the same place on the negative since having the seals replacef?

 

[abruzzi]

Don’t know, but I’m genuinely curious how a shutter can create that flaw because I can’t imagine any possible way.

 

[Bill Burk]

Oh thanks yeah. Light leak. And if you take lots of pictures quickly it won’t be so bad because it’s a function of time.

 

[Paul Manuell]

Oh thanks yeah. Light leak. And if you take lots of pictures quickly it won’t be so bad because it’s a function of time.

So stick a film in, rattle off 15 frames in quick succession and problem solved. Brilliant.

 

[Alex Varas]

Sorry if it’s posted already but... frames with this “error” are consecutive? And were they exposed in a different interval of they are consecutive?

 

[Paul Manuell]

Sorry if it’s posted already but... frames with this “error” are consecutive? And were they exposed in a different interval of they are consecutive?

No, they aren't consecutive. It's happened now maybe 8 or 9 times over about 9 or 10 films, with 2 frames being on a film used since having the film back's seals changed. It's the unpredictable and intermittent nature of it that's the most frustrating.

 

[Bill Burk]

Can you show pictures of the back open? And the light seals (in the holder, right?) Maybe part of the camera body is literally broken and so it’s impossible to seal?

I don’t know if inside the camera chamber... is it perfectly dark?

I once had a camera where light came in a roundabout way that I filled with some epoxy mixed with ground-up film can plastic.

 

[Paul Manuell]

Can you show pictures of the back open? And the light seals (in the holder, right?) Maybe part of the camera body is literally broken and so it’s impossible to seal?

I don’t know if inside the camera chamber... is it perfectly dark?

I once had a camera where light came in a roundabout way that I filled with some epoxy mixed with ground-up film can plastic.

There's nothing broken on/in the camera body and yes, the seals are contained within the film holder.