MrPhotog

You gotta try the digital M11. It might change your mind.

I’ve been going around with the M11 and a 28 mm lens—almost the same setup as the less expensive Q2 or Q3, which has autofocus, a faster lens and closer focusing distance. Makes me think more about the Q3, which has an excellent lens and is about the price of a Leica film- camera body alone.

I go out with the M11, 3 to 5 lenses and an M4 or M4-2. I can use light meter app on my phone or from the M11 for accurate exposure on the film, if I decide the pictures are worth the cost of using the film—and often I’ll not shoot any film that day. That is slowly changing to using more film.

Costs are still an issue, which I am trying to resolve. A big part of that is restarting darkroom work to save on cost of developing the films.

I can process the film in a bathroom, loading the tank in a changing bag. I’ve purchased, but not yet mixed chemistry for both B&W and C-41 color negative development. I’ll batch process enough color rolls (8, in two runs of 4 rolls) to pretty much use up the chemistry in a day, and dump it after that. Water bath is being set up for accurate temperature control. For B&W I’ll use the developer as a one shot and just save the fixer.

I just got another bulk loader today, so I’ll be loading my own, and saving some $$ there.

With these savings in place, I see more film being shot in the future.

BebuLamar

I had a full darkroom before and I never saved money by doing my own processing. Perhaps that was because I shoot color negative films. I do not reuse chemicals either.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Pentax has always used subassemblies manufactured by someone else. They are committed to using modern parts, because part of the modern problem is finding replacement parts. Their staff is significantly reduced these days, so they are having to re-educate their staff while the old engineers are still around while still supporting their current digital products. For example, their modern engineers thought they saw a reason to design the film winding mechanism in a simpler fashion, but retired engineers explained why the old mechanism was used. {It turns out that film-transport mechanism is one part that is unique to modern cameras}. Anyway, the whole task is turning out to be a ‘handful’.

I think I can wait.

BebuLamar

When Nikon made the FM3A which was 20 years ago still they had problem finding source for the meter movement because by that time no cameras used meter movement any more.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

What do you mean by ‘meter movement’?
I would expect them to use the same metering they use for digital cameras.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Before your time.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

The Pentax K1000 had a ‘matching needle’ design, but my Pentax ME/SE from about that same time had a system that used LEDs to report shutter speed, and my Pentax “Super/Program” uses LCDs. I would expect new camera from them to use whatever their compact digital cameras {like the GR3} use.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

It's an arrangement of magnets and coils physically moving an indicator needle. Completely different from what's in a digital camera.

BebuLamar

But it is the meter needle instead of LCD that makes the FM3a so sought after today. People would be willing to pay more for the FM3a than an F5.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

As I implied in my answer to ‘selmsie’, by 1980 Pentax used that design in only their ‘cheapest’ cameras. I believe the design in their ‘better’ cameras {even the one I would purchase} were evolutionary ancestors of the ones they use in their digital cameras.

I thought of purchasing a “Praktaca” once, but both it and the K1000 seemed ‘klunky’ to me. With what I know now, it was their mechanical nature.

Pentax is talking about building a “mechanical” camera as part of their Film Project. I wonder what I will think of that.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

They haven’t talked yet about metering and exposure; if they do, I expect them to address both usability and availability.
{at the Pentax Forum, they expect a video from the design team soon}

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

It would make more sense if they skipped the meter altogether.

Anyone who shoots film has better ways to determine exposure than with an unreliable in-camera meter.

BebuLamar

I am sure Pentax won't use a galvanometer movement but I take it as an example that some of the parts back in the old days 70's/80's which were considered cheap can be hard to source and expensive. I would say the manual film advance Pentax intends to put in their new camera would be more expensive than a motor driven one. And of course motor driven cameras back in the 70's demanded big bucks.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

From their writings so far, Pentax seems to be getting a lot of advice from {Japanese} artists.

Norm Rosenberg

When I do film, mostly with a Canon Model 7 or rarely with a Zorki 4K or Zorki 6.