# Pentax K1000/50mm 1.7/Film... Pic heavy



## jcdeboever

Sorry for posting so many but here are pics from a Pentax K1000/ 50mm 1.7 lens. I rebuilt this camera from the eternal moldy graveyard. It was a literal POS given to me but there was a great artist behind the hardware, so I kept her going. I bought 3 for a total of 15 bucks (not including shipping) to pilfer parts from in order to make one good one but I ended up with two....I think. This is the only roll I shot from it's overhaul. I gave to my daughter who is in college and wanted a film camera. She has yet to send me anything.... I am not holding my breath, she expects me to support her until she is 90. However, after a simple microdot graphite experience, I trust I may own a K1000 as well. The below pics have no post, sorry, I am tired.





















Bad Ass Marine right here.


----------



## spiralout462

Love 'em!  They're great and inspiring.


----------



## timor

Very good. Now I know whom to send my broken cameras.  Really good job.


----------



## jcdeboever

timor said:


> Very good. Now I know whom to send my broken cameras.  Really good job.



Mold is a pain. I wish to never do that again. It reacts as your trying to get rid of it. It moves as if it knows what you are doing.


----------



## timor

Leave it in good box with bleach fumes overnight and it will vanish in them.


----------



## DarkShadow

Nice B&W and good job on the repair.


----------



## 480sparky

Classics captured by a classic!


----------



## jcdeboever

WOW! Did not expect this kind of response. I thought it would be a yawner post! Now I have to load some more film... off to the antique freezer.


----------



## smithdan

First serious camera a Spotmatic, couldn't afford a K1000 when they came out.  Found one a year ago perfect condition $25 and a Tokina 70-210 $25. 

Nice work on the repair and thanks for posting the great pix.


----------



## terri

These are lovely!   You clearly did a great job on the repair.   Kudos to you!


----------



## deeky

Nice shots.  I put the K1000 down when I got my digital.  Didn't get rid of it though.  I think I might have a sensor issue since things seemed to consistently come out dark in the last roll or two.  But I grew up with my mom shooting a K1000 and it was my first SLR.  If nothing else, I geek on the nostalgia.  But then again, I'm the guy that uses a 1949 Touchdown fountain pen as a daily writer with a couple others from the 1930's in my desk.


----------



## 480sparky

deeky said:


> Nice shots.  I put the K1000 down when I got my digital.  Didn't get rid of it though.  I think I might have a sensor issue since things seemed to consistently come out dark in the last roll or two. ................



Yep.  The sensors Pentax put in the K1000's weren't very good.


----------



## Derrel

These are enjoyable photos! Reminds m of the times my grandfather took us to Antique Powerland's summer events. I liked the photos. Not sure how this post snuck by me until tonight...did not see this post!


----------



## deeky

480sparky said:


> Yep.  The sensors Pentax put in the K1000's weren't very good.



OK, it's late on a Friday night.  Meant the light meter-sensor-indicator-thingamabob.  You know..... that little movey thingy at the bottom.

Man, I need to go to bed.


----------



## 480sparky

deeky said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.  The sensors Pentax put in the K1000's weren't very good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, it's late on a Friday night.  Meant the light meter-sensor-indicator-thingamabob.  You know..... that little movey thingy at the bottom.
> 
> Man, I need to go to bed.
Click to expand...


If you mean the meter quit, there_ might_ be a very simple fix.  All you need is a 2.0mm JIS screwdriver to find out. (you might get away with a small 'phillips' jewelers screwdriver, but you run the risk of damaging screws)

Start by removing the battery, and lay it and the battery holder/cover aside.

Remove the three screws that hold the bottom plate on the camera.  Important note:  Although all 3 are the same thread size & pitch, the middle one has a slightly smaller head.  So you'll need to keep track of that one.  Once the 3 screws are safely stowed away, separate the bottom cover of the camera by pulling it straight away from the body.

The place where the button battery sits is a small, moulded plastic piece held on by another 3 screws.  Remove those screws.  There might be a small wire in the way of one, so you'll need be carefully move it out of the way.  Then, the plastic battery part should simply lift away from the camera.  But don't pull too hard.... there's a wire attached to the other side.

Or..... is there?  If the connection got corroded, the wire has become disconnected from the battery terminal attached to the plastic piece.  If you have access to a small soldering rig, you can simply resolder the connection and reassemble everything.

Presto!  A working K1000 meter!

I've rejuvenated 5 or 6 K1000s 'dead meters' this way over the years.


----------



## jcdeboever

480sparky said:


> deeky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.  The sensors Pentax put in the K1000's weren't very good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, it's late on a Friday night.  Meant the light meter-sensor-indicator-thingamabob.  You know..... that little movey thingy at the bottom.
> 
> Man, I need to go to bed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean the meter quit, there_ might_ be a very simple fix.  All you need is a 2.0mm JIS screwdriver to find out. (you might get away with a small 'phillips' jewelers screwdriver, but you run the risk of damaging screws)
> 
> Start by removing the battery, and lay it and the battery holder/cover aside.
> 
> Remove the three screws that hold the bottom plate on the camera.  Important note:  Although all 3 are the same thread size & pitch, the middle one has a slightly smaller head.  So you'll need to keep track of that one.  Once the 3 screws are safely stowed away, separate the bottom cover of the camera by pulling it straight away from the body.
> 
> The place where the button battery sits is a small, moulded plastic piece held on by another 3 screws.  Remove those screws.  There might be a small wire in the way of one, so you'll need be carefully move it out of the way.  Then, the plastic battery part should simply lift away from the camera.  But don't pull too hard.... there's a wire attached to the other side.
> 
> Or..... is there?  If the connection got corroded, the wire has become disconnected from the battery terminal attached to the plastic piece.  If you have access to a small soldering rig, you can simply resolder the connection and reassemble everything.
> 
> Presto!  A working K1000 meter!
> 
> I've rejuvenated 5 or 6 K1000s 'dead meters' this way over the years.
Click to expand...


Excellent breakdown, spot on. I can't believe you remembered all that, amazing!


----------



## Warhorse

Those pictures are great!

You apparently did a wonderful job on the restoration of that camera.


----------



## bulldurham

Odd. I found the sensors in the K1000's to be quite accurate. I have a box full of them I've picked up over the years...some work better than others. When it came to the film portion of my class, the students picked the K1000's over the FM2's everytime.


----------



## IronMaskDuval

Great set! Did you find a usb adapter that you could tape to the film to plug into lightroom for post processing?


----------



## gsgary

What film were you using ?


----------



## jcdeboever

gsgary said:


> What film were you using ?


According to my notes, it was Kodak T-Max 400 B&W. Dwayne's photo processed them. I am not super excited for the film to be honest, not sure why, but it lacks something. 

I used to have a preference for a certain film (when I developed them) and I can't remember what it was. I think it was Ilford Delta 400 or HP5. Might of been ADOX Silvermax as well because I recently threw out an empty bottle of the ADOX Silvermax developer. I am not a film expert but I know what I like when I see it, like your recent post of the hunters. I am not sure if I am saying this right but I like a silvery, tight grain, quality if that makes sense.  I have very little interest in developing, I was never really into it. I did it because it was cheaper to do it myself, and hang out with my uncle. I know a lot of people love to develop their own and I get it but I am just not that into it. My uncle taught me how to do it years ago and he was really into it, so I did it to impress him.


----------



## gsgary

jcdeboever said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> What film were you using ?
> 
> 
> 
> According to my notes, it was Kodak T-Max 400 B&W. Dwayne's photo processed them. I am not super excited for the film to be honest, not sure why, but it lacks something.
> 
> I used to have a preference for a certain film (when I developed them) and I can't remember what it was. I think it was Ilford Delta 400 or HP5. Might of been ADOX Silvermax as well because I recently threw out an empty bottle of the ADOX Silvermax developer. I am not a film expert but I know what I like when I see it, like your recent post of the hunters. I am not sure if I am saying this right but I like a silvery, tight grain, quality if that makes sense.  I have very little interest in developing, I was never really into it. I did it because it was cheaper to do it myself, and hang out with my uncle. I know a lot of people love to develop their own and I get it but I am just not that into it. My uncle taught me how to do it years ago and he was really into it, so I did it to impress him.
Click to expand...

If you developed your own you will have more control of how it looks, I'm  going to fire up my laptop and post some HP5 shots (my favourite 400)

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk


----------



## gsgary

I love HP5 at iso800

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk


----------



## jcdeboever

gsgary said:


> I love HP5 at iso800
> 
> Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk



So, if I find it is that film, I should tell them to push it to 800? It sounds familiar, I think that it what I was doing. I was fighting a lot in those days and probably had a few concussions because I can't remember jack from those days.


----------



## gsgary

jcdeboever said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> I love HP5 at iso800
> 
> Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, if I find it is that film, I should tell them to push it to 800? It sounds familiar, I think that it what I was doing. I was fighting a lot in those days and probably had a few concussions because I can't remember jack from those days.
Click to expand...

If you shoot it at 800 I like the contrasty look

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk


----------



## jcdeboever

gsgary said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> I love HP5 at iso800
> 
> Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, if I find it is that film, I should tell them to push it to 800? It sounds familiar, I think that it what I was doing. I was fighting a lot in those days and probably had a few concussions because I can't remember jack from those days.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you shoot it at 800 I like the contrasty look
> 
> Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


Will give it a try sir. Gonna be a while but just dropped a note in the Pentax bag.


----------



## gsgary

I would try a roll of HP5, some examples at iso800












at 400


----------



## jcdeboever

gsgary said:


> I would try a roll of HP5, some examples at iso800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> at 400



That's the look! Man, thank you so much for doing that, I really appreciate it.


----------



## Photosensitive

Excellent set of images.....


----------



## gsgary

People say that HP5 should not be developed in Rodinal, stand developed in the fridge for 
1 hour, M4-2 and my new then Voigtlander 50F1.5asph wide open at F1.5


----------



## jcdeboever

gsgary said:


> People say that HP5 should not be developed in Rodinal, stand developed in the fridge for
> 1 hour, M4-2 and my new then Voigtlander 50F1.5asph wide open at F1.5


That is on such another level really. Makes me sad that I didn't take photography seriously back in the day. I was so into drawing and painting. The camera was just a tool for me back then. Looking back, my uncle was trying to get me to see it as an art form and I missed it.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## gsgary

This might interest you, T Max100 shot at iso400 and stand developed in Rodinal with 18g of Sodium Sulphite, similar look to what you like


----------



## jcdeboever

gsgary said:


> This might interest you, T Max100 shot at iso400 and stand developed in Rodinal with 18g of Sodium Sulphite, similar look to what you like


I see what your doing, your such a tease.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## gsgary

It's all about developing yourself

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk


----------



## jcdeboever

gsgary said:


> Just  been to your profile page and realised you must be Jewish ? here is my wife placing a stone hope you don't mind



I don't mind but how you got I was Jewish from my profile page escapes me? My family immigrated from Belgium, they were farmers. I was born and raised in the city of Detroit.


----------



## jcdeboever

gsgary said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just  been to your profile page and realised you must be Jewish ? here is my wife placing a stone hope you don't mind
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't mind but how you got I was Jewish from my profile page escapes me? I am Belgium.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You had some Hebrew was I wrong ?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


I am confused... Hebrew?


----------



## jcdeboever

Oh , I just seen a profile visit, never noticed that before. I usually use the tapatalk phone app and can't see it on there. Can see it on the desktop, that was a while ago too. I deleted it, not sure what that was about. That's not me, someone posted that as a visit? Strange.


----------



## gsgary

jcdeboever said:


> Oh , I just seen a profile visit, never noticed that before. I usually use the tapatalk phone app and can't see it on there. Can see it on the desktop, that was a while ago too. I deleted it, not sure what that was about. That's not me, someone posted that as a visit? Strange.


My bad just realise people can post message I'm  a  bloody idiot [emoji1] 

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk


----------



## jcdeboever

gsgary said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh , I just seen a profile visit, never noticed that before. I usually use the tapatalk phone app and can't see it on there. Can see it on the desktop, that was a while ago too. I deleted it, not sure what that was about. That's not me, someone posted that as a visit? Strange.
> 
> 
> 
> My bad just realise people can post message I'm  a  bloody idiot [emoji1]
> 
> Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It's all good, I didn't know either. I hardly go there. 

Shoot, thinking about it, I wonder if that was the guy I was going to give my old Sony digital to? He might have responded that way instead of PM'ing me. 

You should probably unattach that in post #39

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## timor

I took closer look at your scans. I think you are scanning negatives, right ? How much pp you gave them ? Seems like a lot of sharpening. Now another question steaming from that. How old was the film ? What was the processing of film ? Exactly the temperature is on my mind. Looks like there is, consistent in every frame reticulation. OK, I see, no pp, just the scanner itself.


----------



## gsgary

480sparky said:


> deeky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice shots.  I put the K1000 down when I got my digital.  Didn't get rid of it though.  I think I might have a sensor issue since things seemed to consistently come out dark in the last roll or two. ................
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.  The sensors Pentax put in the K1000's weren't very good.
Click to expand...

What are you on about ? you get a clean one every 24 or 36 shots


----------



## 480sparky

gsgary said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deeky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice shots.  I put the K1000 down when I got my digital.  Didn't get rid of it though.  I think I might have a sensor issue since things seemed to consistently come out dark in the last roll or two. ................
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.  The sensors Pentax put in the K1000's weren't very good.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What are you on about ? you get a clean one every 24 or 36 shots
Click to expand...


Wow.  You mean you need to buy 2 or 3 dozen sensors just to get a new one?  Boy, are YOU getting ripped off.  I get a new one each time I click the shutter.


----------



## gsgary

480sparky said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deeky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice shots.  I put the K1000 down when I got my digital.  Didn't get rid of it though.  I think I might have a sensor issue since things seemed to consistently come out dark in the last roll or two. ................
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.  The sensors Pentax put in the K1000's weren't very good.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What are you on about ? you get a clean one every 24 or 36 shots
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow.  You mean you need to buy 2 or 3 dozens sensors just to get a new one?  Boy, are YOU getting ripped off.  I get a new one each time I click the shutter.
Click to expand...

It's  a 5 feet wide sensor so it is every roll

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk


----------



## jcdeboever

timor said:


> I took closer look at your scans. I think you are scanning negatives, right ? How much pp you gave them ? Seems like a lot of sharpening. Now another question steaming from that. How old was the film ? What was the processing of film ? Exactly the temperature is on my mind. Looks like there is, consistent in every frame reticulation. OK, I see, no pp, just the scanner itself.


Are you referring to mine? I just pulled them off the CD using Gimp / Linux. Dwayne's Photo did all the work. The film was not very old and in kept cool. I have a few expired rolls of B&W but have not used them yet. I am going to use them in my Holga35 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## timor

Thanks.
There is an inherent problem with labs and b&w film. They tend to overdevelop film just to make sure there is something on it. So it was them doing post on scans and they caused what seems to be reticulation on whatever is that texture in the pics. It is very hard to cause reticulation with modern films, but happens. B&w film development is much more "organic" and always specific to the guy, who does it.


----------



## jcdeboever

timor said:


> Thanks.
> There is an inherent problem with labs and b&w film. They tend to overdevelop film just to make sure there is something on it. So it was them doing post on scans and they caused what seems to be reticulation on whatever is that texture in the pics. It is very hard to cause reticulation with modern films, but happens. B&w film development is much more "organic" and always specific to the guy, who does it.


I will have to see if I inadvertently ran a script for sharpening. I may have done that not knowing or intentionally. Many times I will load a folder and batch sharpen them on export. I may have got distracted and done that. I will get back. It's never a strong sharpening but probably would be more aggressive on a scan vs DSLR image now that I think about it. I can see me doing that because I work in terminal mode more than start x (desktop). I bet I did it out of habit. 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## jcdeboever

Good eye @timor... I looked at the CD and compared them, then looked my script history and sure as *hit, I did it. However, they are not much different. It's a light sharpen. Pixel peep, its apparent though. 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## timor

I wasn't looking for sharpening. It was byproduct of looking at strange texture of this pics.


----------



## Patriot

Make me want to use my spotmatic. However I need to fix the sticky mirror first.


----------

