A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Classic Manual Cameras > Ummm....Sears....KS-1...don't...

Ummm....Sears....KS-1...don't laugh..yet

F P , Aug 13, 2005; 05:41 p.m.

Hi. Anybody know about the Sears KS-1? I just bought one, thinking I was buying a re-branded Pentax. Imagine my suprise once I realized (I think) it's made by Ricoh. Anyway, it is extremely clean and came with a SEARS (really) 135mm f/2.8 lens as well as a Sears 50mm f/2, a (leather?) case and a strap. All for less than $50 bucks. Did I get taken? Can't find any reviews. Anyway, here's a pic from my first roll. F.

sears 135mm f/2.8 Fuji Neopan 400


    1   |   2   |   3     Next    Last

F P , Aug 13, 2005; 05:49 p.m.

Oh...and if this is not pre-1970, please excuse the post.

Nick Clarke , Aug 13, 2005; 05:53 p.m.

The camera is a Ricoh XR-6 - see Michael Butkus's site at www.butkus.org for a lot more details.


F P , Aug 13, 2005; 05:56 p.m.

With a Pentax K mount? That is wierd. Clearly I lack education in this area. How do the camera, and particularly the lenses, rate? If it proves to be a dud, at least I can use Pentax lenses on it.

Donald Grindstaff , Aug 13, 2005; 06:10 p.m.

I do not know how it rates but I had one in middle and high school years ago and I loved it. I learned everything I needed to know from it I kinda regret selling it. I think you got a good deal do not worry about what others think just shoot. Enjoy.

Kevin Bourque , Aug 13, 2005; 06:56 p.m.

I had one with a Sears 50mm f1.4. It was a very nice lens, no complaints.

Jorn Ake , Aug 13, 2005; 09:44 p.m.

Can anyone explain the popularity of 135mm lenses on cameras of this era? Is it related to the range of lenses that were available for rangefinder cameras that SLR cameras were replacing - i.e. did lens designers just switch over the designs to SLR mounts? Eb$y shows plenty of these lenses as part of kits from this era, so I was just wondering.

And if you pay $50 and get a body and 2 lenses and you put film in it and it takes nice photos then you are doing alright. Shoot some more.

Donald Qualls , Aug 13, 2005; 10:58 p.m.

I have a hunch 135 mm was the longest they could make a lens and still get it faster than f/4, at least at one point -- and by the time they could make an f/3.5 155 mm, the 135 mm was seen as a standard. It's abou 3x over the true "normal" 45 mm, or 2.5x over the "long normal" 55 mm, which is a convenient length -- still makes a decent portrait lens, but it's long enough to be worth changing for for things like sports and wildlife. A 155 was a lot heavier than 135, too.

Adam Maas , Aug 13, 2005; 11:35 p.m.

The Camera's a Ricoh, the lenses are rebranded Ricoh's that are really rebranded Pentax(in most cases).

Good deal. I've a little more cash in my KR-5sv (Cosina SLR in K-mount really), but I got a 200mm f4 instead of the 135.

There's very little info as to Ricoh stuff on the web, at least the SLR's.

Andrew Hall , Aug 14, 2005; 12:41 a.m.

>the lenses are rebranded Ricoh's that are really rebranded Pentax(in most cases).

Any reference to that claim? Just because they shared the same lens mount, doesn't mean they were "really rebranded Pentax."

Other K mount camera systems were offered by Cosina, Chinon, Petri, and even Zenit. http://www.butkus.org/chinon/

    1   |   2   |   3     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses