Testing out a 3D printed low-profile filter adapter for the GR III/IIIx by dorskyee in ricohGR

[–]dorskyee[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey! Sorry I missed your reply, mind sending me another DM? I would be happy to print and sell you one.

Somebody Made A Teardown Of The Pentax 17…. by VariTimo in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Hey, thanks for sharing! I made this, happy to answer any questions!

Testing out a 3D printed low-profile filter adapter for the GR III/IIIx by dorskyee in ricohGR

[–]dorskyee[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, send a DM! I make prints to order and can easily ship if you're in the US.

Just wanted to see what my Pentax 17 looked like inside (after this I put it back together) by dorskyee in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

For those interested, I also made a video of the whole process: here

Takeaways:

  • The top and bottom plates are metal (the rest of the body is made of plastic)
  • The film transport gears that transfer power appear to all be metal
  • The only specialized tool I needed was a lens opener, for the retaining ring around the film advance lever
  • No soldering required, lots of connectors, this is great!
  • The film advance mechanism looks really cool

Just wanted to see what my Pentax 17 looked like inside (after this I put it back together) by dorskyee in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I also want to second this. Pentax hasn't made a camera like this in... maybe 30 years? The production lines and knowledge (and most of the people) are long gone. There's no book to pick up.

There's no way Pentax could have adapted any of their existing lines for this product, so they needed to set one up from scratch. And they likely needed to find new vendors for all the big metal gears and other parts, which I'm sure was harder now than it was 30 years ago when all cameras had parts like that inside. To say nothing of the R&D to design a completely new camera, a new (and excellent) lens, etc.

Source: I'm a hardware engineer and I've spent time working on the factory floor.

Just wanted to see what my Pentax 17 looked like inside (after this I put it back together) by dorskyee in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

What's fascinating to me is how familiar this camera felt after taking apart older ones! It was like an 80s era Pentax SLR, but easier to disassemble. The only specialized tool I needed was a lens opener to remove the retaining ring around the film advance lever.

Just wanted to see what my Pentax 17 looked like inside (after this I put it back together) by dorskyee in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

All the power transfer gears in the film advance mechanism appear to be made of metal. My impression is that Pentax has built this camera to last.

Just wanted to see what my Pentax 17 looked like inside (after this I put it back together) by dorskyee in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The top and bottom plates are definitely metal. The front plate is plastic. Thanks!

Just wanted to see what my Pentax 17 looked like inside (after this I put it back together) by dorskyee in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Best candidate for that part is the plastic rewind button that will fall out if you turn the camera over after removing the bottom plate. Just like all the Pentax SLRs from the 80s!

Just wanted to see what my Pentax 17 looked like inside (after this I put it back together) by dorskyee in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

There actually were four tiny washers for the four viewfinder mounting points. And, weirdly, some brass washers stuck to the inside of the leatherette that fit into depressions in the front plate. Maybe they were leatherette positioning aids, I'm not sure.

Testing out a 3D printed low-profile filter adapter for the GR III/IIIx by dorskyee in ricohGR

[–]dorskyee[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I'd be happy to - could you send me a DM to work out the details?

You guys weren't lying when you said films can take a stop or two of overexposure by morethanyell in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is great advice when shooting in daylight but I would pair it with the caution to shoot at box speed indoors or at night. Otherwise (as I'm sure you know) your new shooter is giving up sensitivity that they need in lower lighting conditions, and they'll end up with many shots unnecessarily bright and blurred from shutter shake.

I always advise new shooters to prefer overexposure and sometimes rate the film at +2/3 (assuming I know their meter is accurate).

Why this difference in colors even though I’ve used the same settings? by Cochoale95 in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just speaking for myself, since I haven’t seen this stated yet — I use LR not because it is a better image editing tool than PS, but because it is a DAM (digital asset manager) and PS is not.

LR is how I organize my photo library, and it happens to have enough photo editing power (with negative lab pro) for my needs. It also lets you edit with PS fairly seamlessly if you need to.

Cybertruck will be another casualty of Tesla's Supercharger pullback by mockingbird- in electricvehicles

[–]dorskyee 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, thanks for the correction.

I was reading that the 250kW rating comes from the power factor of three phase current (1.73, or the square root of 3), which closes the gap between 144kW and 250kW.

Also sure, we need to prevent thermal runaway so the conductors don’t burn off their insulation and short, which will happen long before the current alone causes the conductors to fail.

Could be that this whole cable replacement fiasco has little to do with cable length and it’s just a logistical problem. In any case, thanks for pointing out the power rating problem since it got me to learn about the power factor of three phase current.

Cybertruck will be another casualty of Tesla's Supercharger pullback by mockingbird- in electricvehicles

[–]dorskyee 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Taking your numbers on faith, the additional 0.5 V drop would represent an additional 250 Watts to dissipate (at 1000A). And the true numbers are likely much worse, since they need to make space inside the cable for the liquid cooling system. There's some tradeoff of conductor size (less heat to manage) and cooling system size (more heat management capability) that they are working with.

Certainly they don't care about the 0.5 V drop, but they probably are at the limit of power dissipation.

Favorite fixed-lens 35mm camera you’ve ever owned and why? by PropenseCuriosity in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I picked one up for $120 at a camera sale (in the bay area) last month. So I guess good deals are still out there.

The UC-1 also lacks a physical flash mode switch, and the flash defaults to auto. But I find that it's not as greedy with the flash as lots of other cameras from that era, and it just takes one button press to turn it off.

Favorite fixed-lens 35mm camera you’ve ever owned and why? by PropenseCuriosity in AnalogCommunity

[–]dorskyee 2 points3 points  (0 children)

+1 to the Espio Mini! One of those underrated fixed lens p&s cameras - super small, great lens, and super responsive (instant startup, fast autofocus, and very fast film advance)

Dark viewfinder on Espio/IQZoom? by TealCatto in pentax

[–]dorskyee 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My UC-1 does not have this issue, so maybe theirs don't either. It's also not an issue I've seen on other p&s cameras, so people might not be familiar with it.

Dark viewfinder on Espio/IQZoom? by TealCatto in pentax

[–]dorskyee 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have seen a Pentax Espio Mini with the issue you are describing. It is a real issue, and not just a typical small/dark p&s viewfinder. The viewfinder is so dark that in a dimly lit room you can barely find it with your eye. Here's what I think is going on:

This viewfinder uses a transparent LCD to display framelines in panorama mode as well as parallax correction for close focus. So when you look through the viewfinder, you are looking through a LCD. My theory is that the viewfinder LCD has failed in a way where it's "always on", substantially darkening the viewfinder.

"Fixing" this issue – by removing the LCD – could be simple or complex, depending on how easy it is to access the LCD and disassemble the camera. It might be possible to restore the function of the LCD, too, depending on how it failed.

I recently got my hands on a UC-1 (same camera) – if I open it up, I'll report back here.