Comparing Pentax AUTO 110 and AUTO 110 SUPER Film Camera systems.

March 16, 2018

#242

Gentle reader,

I have rarely seen the improved version of by far the smallest Single Lens Reflex camera made by Pentax and called the AUTO 110. I've owned an number of them over the years and not so long ago bought a complete system kit. They made a larger more complete system called SYSTEM 10 which included rubber lens hoods for the three lenses, as well as filters and close-up lenses too. One kit came in an aluminum briefcase. The "10" came in a larger cardboard box similar to these.

While the boxes are the same size, the markings are different. Note "ASAHI" is missing from the SUPER box and PENTAX now has a copyright symbol next to it.

This is what I saw when opening this kit which I scored for only $70. The seller stated that it appeared the camera, etcetera had not been used. My examination showed that they all had been used and sadly, the flash and winder had suffered battery corrosion and despite my best efforts, they remained dead. The case appears to be suede, but may be synthetic. The original soft case was vinyl. Strap is still sealed in plastic. All lens caps and viewfinder cap are still here as is the flash case.

This is the older original  kit. As you can see, the fabric has aged. Speaking of aged, according to my 1999 ORION CAMERA BLUE BOOK, the original AUTO 110 came out in 1979 and was made through 1983. They are listed under: Instamatic. Two years later (1985) the SUPER model came out for the same price of $180 for the camera and 24mm lens alone. No information on the cost of the various system kits they sold. Oddly, looking through the book, I find the AUTO 110 SUPER also listed under Subminiature and coming out in 1995, I believe that to be a typo. Here, they listed the Super body alone as selling for $201.

Further searching shows the 20-40mm Zoom lens sold new for $180. The 50mm for $90. The 24mm for $60. The 18mm pan focus for $60 also, I don't see the wide angle 18mm listed. The 70mm telephoto listed for $100. The AF130P flash retailed for $55. No listings for the smaller flash.

Below, the body changes are detailed in the photos and text. 

Most obvious are the height and labels.

Super model's lever is taller and longer.

Super model's top is stepped and surrounds the shutter button.

Main difference is the Super model has a three-way switch that surrounds the winding lever. Settings are: Locked, Auto, Self-timer. Standard model had no way to turn the camera on and off. Perhaps the winding lever did so?

There is a collar around the flash terminals on the Super. It stabilizes the flash which tends to wobble on the standard body. The little tab device in front of the collar is used to lift the plastic cover for the flash terminals.

RED LED serves as a flashing timer during self timer countdown. And is the most visible clue to it being a Super body. Note, that "ASAHI" is no longer on the face on the Super.

Above is a button that is used for exposure compensation. Say your subject is backlit, press the button and the meter compensates by setting exposure for the subject rather than the brightness behind.

No changes to the bottom. The Winder is now a Winder II. As I noted above, it does not work. I'll be on the lookout for one of those too.

Since I have no written information yet on the SUPER, I can offer no other words as to the differences between the two. It seems Pentax (less ASAHI) was hoping to rekindle interest in their wee camera by updating it and yet keeping the retail price the same as the old model. Based upon their rarity, not many fold ponied up to buy one.

Once again, thanks for looking!

Scott

March 16, 2018 

 

Thank YOU Dear Readers! 150,000 Page Views as of 3-12-2018! Meet Maria the Prague Ratter: Tiniest Dogs?

March 13, 2018

#240

Gentle reader,

This special chapter in my humble blog serves two purposes: First to THANK YOU for reading my blog! I never dreamt that my writing and photography world generate so much interest. Your kind words and encouragement are truly heart warming. I cannot thank you enough. Second to introduce you to one of the smallest dog breeds in the world.

We joined FaceBook because our kids were members, and since they tend to post EVERYTHING they do on FaceBook, we wanted to see what they were up to. 

Over time, I came across Groups on FaceBook and joined a multitude that interested me. Of course, there was no way FaceBook could post things from so many groups so I narrowed it down to what was currently my passion: Music listening with classic stereo equipment. Those groups became my largest readership groups. Their loyal following of my articles on the subject propelled this humble blog past 50,000 and then 100,000 page views.

I finally had a stereo (after 40+ years) that I was completely satisfied with and the bickering and sometime putdowns of audio enthusiasts in some of those groups started to get old. So, I left all of them.

One of my passions that started when I found an old Yashica J camera at a church bazaar, started me collecting and using old film cameras. I eventually sold off most of the collection and like so many, turned to digital cameras.

I do not recall how, but something sparked my getting back into film photography and I started collecting cameras again. I have bought film, but have not yet shot with any. Waiting for warm Spring weather. I wrote about this rekindled interest and posted my blog links in those FaceBook groups to enthusiastic readers. 

My latest article can be found here:Using Vintage Film Camera Lenses on Digital Camera Bodies PART TWO. This post propelled my readership to over 150,000. 

It turns out that I had deleted Part One because I had found that using classic Leica rangefinder lenses on a digital (or film) SLR camera yields only close-up photos. Since I had not kept any of the (few) images I made with that setup, I deleted the article.

And now, let me introduce you to Maria:     

Her full name is: Fraulein Maria Von Tiny Dancer. She is sitting with Heidi, one of our Dachshunds. Heidi is smaller than a standard Dachshund and a lot fatter than when my wife and daughter rescued her from the Animal Shelter. 

We were cat people. Having as many as five. I rescued three kitten sisters from my work and another that was also found at work and brought to me. While my wife had a Dachshund as a child, and my family had a Corgi long ago. Since then it was cats. Our other Dachshund, Gretchen is the typical wiener dog, reddish coat and all. Gretchen is a small, possibly a miniature Dachshund. 

Here is how Gretchen came to us. One day, Nancy came home from work and didn't come to find me as she always did. So, I went to see where she was. I found the bedroom door closed. Upon opening it, I saw her standing there. "What's going on?" I asked. "It's true what they say," she replied and pointed to her feet. A tiny puppy was standing there wagging it's tiny tail. I melted into a big man-puddle and scooped her up. That was how we became dog people. Heidi is quite a bit longer than Gretchen. I tell you this to establish the size of Prague Ratters.

Our daughter posted a photo of her new puppy, named Mini Cooper, Mini for short, on FaceBook. She was eight weeks old. My wife saw the photo, asked Bekka where she got Mini and immediately they went to the breeder. I knew nothing of this, as I knew nothing of Heidi's coming to live with us. Or Gretchen. See a pattern?

As a reference, here is my hand. Maria and Mini are over two years old now and both weigh around FOUR pounds. So, back to the story.

Nancy left, saying she was going shopping with Bekka. Sometime later, she came home, handed me an eight week old puppy and said, "Happy Birthday!" The rest is joyful history.

At first, we thought they were Miniature Pinschers, thus Maria's German name, but they stopped growing at this size. So we thought there might be micro Pinschers. But there are not. One day, I was watching YouTube and saw a video about the 10 smallest dog breeds in the world. Pražský Krysařík, Prague Ratter, in English was listed as the second smallest after some Russian breed in the video. They are native to the Czech Republic and are very rare outside of there. Apparently the breeder did not know what he had since these dogs as puppies sell for around $3,000. I am half-Czech on my mother's side. So, small world.

Mini on the left, Maria on the right.

 Mini, Gretchen, Maria & Heidi.

We have learned a lot about the breed since. They are very smart, very loyal and agile. Maria has developed a bunch of dance moves that are quite fun to watch. Mini, has come to live with us as well and Mini has been learning Maria's tricks and other activities. Mini has longer legs than Maria and their fur is slightly different. Mini's eyes are a little more buggy as well. Both are as sweet as can be, love to cuddle and are very affectionate.

Above, is a photo that Nancy made. Mini is on the left, Maria on the right. They both look just trilled to be wearing little outfits.

Finally, I've done something I rarely do, take a photo of myself. I prefer to be behind the camera as I am in the photo. I need a shave and haircut, but here I am: 

How did I get this shot? Why with a mirror, of course. It was one click in Photoshop to reverse the image so I and the camera are correctly oriented. I hate taking photos of myself and tried different expressions and poses, choosing this as the least silly or sad. The camera is my favorite of the Panasonic Lumix that I have. Best of their Leica lenses: Vario-Summarit. Sadly, even it could not make me look good.

Here are some of the shots that I had planned to use in Part One of the saga about using classic lenses on digital camera bodies:

My Leica IIIC on the left and a Soviet Zorki (Leica copy) on the right. Various lenses for both in front with a copy of the Leica Elmar 50mm f3.5 collapsible lens mounted on the Nikon here and below in close-up.

One Japanese and a bunch or Soviet copies of German lenses arrayed but never actually shot with on the Nikon.

The one on the right, in front is a "retro-focus" 35mm lens. The rear element sticks way into the body so it cannot be used on any digital body that I have tried. This fact and  the close-up only prompted one of my fellow shooters to suggest I buy a mirrorless camera body. Which I did and am enjoying learning to shoot with classic lenses on modern digital camera bodies.

Thank you again!

Scott

March 13, 2018

#240  

 

Using Vintage Film Camera Lenses on Digital Camera Bodies PART TWO.

March 12, 2018

#239

Gentle reader,

Some time ago, I wrote about adapting vintage film camera lenses to my Nikon Digital SLR. I chose an adapter for Leica Screw/Thread/M39 rangefinder camera lenses. Knowing full well, the difference between the lens-mount-to-film-plane is much greater with SLR camera bodies than rangefinder bodies. Someone in the vintage camera collector group suggested, "Why don't you get a mirrorless camera body?"

At first, I thought, "I can't afford one of those." Having seen them in camera magazines, I thought they were very expensive. Again, knowing full well that digital cameras like cars get much cheaper to buy when they are used and a few years old. Expensive when new, yes, this one was over $600 when it came out. I got it for $75. via eBay.

Back to that lens-mount-to-film-plane topic I brought up above. I had compared my Cosina-made Voigtlander Bessa R to a Cosina SLR body in an earlier blog chapter, here are two photos from that article vividly showing the difference:

You can clearly see that the black Bessa rangefinder body is made from the same parts as the SLR body. Yet, look at how much thicker the SLR body is because it has to have room for the mirror and prism so that one can look through the lens. Remove the need for a mirror and being able to see EXACTLY what you will be shooting and the body is only as thick as it needs to be to hold and transport the film. Viewfinder and rangefinder cameras always have a slightly off-center view which the closer one gets to their subject becomes more pronounced. This is called "parallax error". See, below, where the viewfinder window is compared to the lens opening? One of the reasons SLR cameras became dominant over all other types as time went by.

I have read a tremendous amount of information about mirrorless cameras in the last week or so. Several different types to choose from are available. Since I love my Panasonic Lumix cameras (my DMC-LX3 with Leica Vario-Summarit lens makes all my Internet photos) with their Leica lenses and superb build quality. And I have loved Olympus cameras since my first one I bought in 1995, it made sense to look at their mirrorless offerings.

The two companies cooperated in using (and inventing?) Four-Thirds mirrorless cameras and then creating the Micro Four Thirds cameras and lenses. In the former, Panasonic created one lens, a 14-45mm zoom lens for their three types of Lumix 4/3 cameras: GX, GH, GF and maybe a few other G+ names were chosen. The REST of the lens line for these non-micro four thirds cameras were made by Leica. And, unlike their Lumix 4/3 bodies, the Leica lenses STILL go for big bucks. So, I won't be buying one of those.

I wanted an SLR-type body so that it has an eye-level-viewfinder. I am certainly used to EVF* cameras  *(Electronic View Finders) since my Fujifilm Finepix S7000 from many years ago. The ONE thing I don't like about my two pocketable Lumix cameras is having to use the screen on the back to compose and make photos. Not as steady as holding a camera against your forehead. Too much like a phone, but I digress.

I chose a Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Micro Four Thirds (shortened to: MFT and M4/3 for eBay search purposes) body since adapters are made for them that accept Pentax 110 lenses (got 'em all!) AND Leica M39 (see other code names above) that allow the multitude of classic Leica and other camera brand's lenses from WAY back to be used on these cameras.

This photo differs from the one at the very top of the article due to the angle I shot. Plus, I chose "Original Size" for it. Sadly, you can't see it that big. ANYWAY, above are all the  lenses (plus two Pentax 110 lenses not yet shown) that I have adapters for that I can use on ANY Micro Four Thirds camera. ON the body is a Soviet copy of a Zeiss Sonnar 85mm f2.0 lens. On the very left, top is a Sigma 18mm lens, next to that is another Soviet copy of a Zeiss Sonnar lens, this one is 135mm f4.0. Then the body and my one and only Canon M39 lens, this a 100mm f4.0, and farthest right is a Sigma 12mm f8.0 (slow, I know) full-frame fisheye lens. Both Sigma lenses are T-mount, well, the 18mm is YS, but same mount, YS lenses and adapters allow the lens' apertures to be operated by the body they are mounted on. FRONT ROW is a Pentax 110 18mm wide angle lens, then the 85mm on the camera. To the right of that is another Soviet copy of a Zeiss Sonnar lens, this one the fastest, 50mm (5cm if you prefer) f1.5 which is normally on my Leica IIIC camera. IN front of that is the Pentax 110 "normal" lens which is 24mm, mounted on the adapter and lastly the Pentax 110 50mm telephoto lens.
NOTE: The M39 Jupiter 35mm lens will not work on this camera since it is retro-focus and the real element sticks way into the camera body.

The cool thing about these cameras, is that the M4/3 sensor is almost exactly the same size as 110 film frames are. So, Pentax 110 lenses are ideal for this! Here is the camera with the basic three lenses:

18mm wide angle lens.

24mm "normal" lens.

50mm telephoto lens.

I also am fortunate to have the illusive 20-40mm Zoom lens and graceful 70mm, the 70mm has the factory lens shade. The zoom lens and 70mm are the only all-metal lenses of the six made for the Pentax 110 tiny SLR camera. And as you can see they are much larger.

Admittedly, these huge (on the Pentax) lenses look great on the Lumix. Here is a photo made with the "normal" 24mm lens:

Yes, it is a little blurry. I'm 61 and use reading glasses. This camera has a diopter adjustment for the EVF, however, until I get a lens made for this camera, I can't adjust the diopter to my eye. So, I guess at focus correctness. And no, the screen does not help.

If you decide to try shooting classic lenses on a modern digital body you too will find it has a steep learning curve. Here are more photos shot with the combination, this time Leica rangefinder lenses:

First three were shot with the Jupiter 3 50mm f1.5 lens. 

A photo of my wife at 29, before we married. Yes, it is not that dark normally. Below is looking at the window, I focused upon the little solar powered toys. Yes, the T-Rex lost an arm, he tended to move around and fall off the window. All are secured with reusable adhesive putty.

These three were shot with the Jupiter 85mm f2.0 lens. 

I played with the aperture on these two.

So far, I have found that using the "S" setting which is shutter speed priority, that the images look right in the EVF and fold-out screen, however, when I press the shutter, it shows a lower speed in RED, what I do not know yet, is whether it is CHOOSING that speed or if I'M supposed to use that speed! So, I take another shot with THAT speed and it shows a lower number again!
The great thing about using a digital body with film lenses is, other than the cost of the body and adapters, there is no cost and one can shoot as many photos as they want experimenting. Fortunately, this particular camera came with everything it came with new, so I have the manual to read and learn from. I have a lot of experimenting to do to get this right.
Will we get BETTER photos using classic lenses than the lenses that are MADE to work perfectly with the digital body we have chosen? That is subjective. Here's a story I heard once:

"A wedding photographer is invited to the bride's parents home to show samples of his work, hoping to get the wedding job. As the parents and bride-to-be look through his portfolio, the mother said, 'Oh, you take wonderful photos! You must have a good camera.' He keeps what he wants to say to himself and nods his thanks. After dinner, he says to the mother, 'Dinner was wonderful, you must have a good pot'."

The point I'm making is the person behind the camera makes the photos great or average. While the freedom (provided correct adapters exist for your lenses) of using all kinds and focal lengths of lenses on something they were not made to be used on is wonderful, it is time consuming to see what does and does not work. Below are photos of all the lenses not already shown mounted on the Lumix body:

The Jupiter 3 50mm f1.5 lens above looks cloudy at first, but I had stopped it all the way down. Just look at all those aperture blades that make a circle rather than something with many straight sides.

Right now, you may be thinking, "Didn't he write that these are Sigma lenses?" Right you are. Both were made by Sigma and sold with their own name or Spiratone which was a huge photographer supply company back in the day. See the Greek Sigma symbol preceding the serial number? Plus the 18mm lens cap also has the sigma symbol on it.

Since I have no lens cap for this beast, I keep it in a soft cloth bag. Thus, dust collects on it. Plus, the camera seller attempted to clean the body and left some white paper towel specks on the body.  Have you ever cleaned the rim of a steering wheel on a vehicle that is several years old? Yuck! The stuff that comes off of it. Various plastics tend to really hold on to dirt.

Final thoughts: As you may know, the longer the lens the harder it is to have a large maximum aperture. Thus so many zoom lenses are: "f3.5-6.7" as an example. When looking through these two lenses which mount further away from the body, especially this one which is VERY slow at f8, the image is quite dark which requires a very slow shutter speed. They DO make T-mount adapters for these, so that opens even more lens opportunities.
I admit that I have yet to venture outside to experiment, so all images are subject to available light indoors. Thus the Jupiter 3 with it's super fast f1.5 aperture excels with available light. All the Pentax 110 lenses are f2.0 BUT, they lack apertures since the camera provides a built-in two-blade aperture.So, it is strictly shutter speed and no depth of field adjustment with those lenses.
The warmer the weather gets (despite being still winter, here in Virginia, we have had some warm days and trees are budding and some flowers are already up) the more I will be outside making lots of photos with this and many other cameras and lenses. Being a member of the vintage camera collector groups on FaceBook has inspired me to get back to my love of making beautiful photos.

Thanks for looking,
Scott
March 12, 2018