David Hughes
David Hughes
Lens hoods by Pentax specifically for the 40mm are like hens' teeth.
Regards, David
Regards, David
I'm confused...the M3 is going away for awhile and you're looking for a replacement... How'd you use the M3 in aperture priority?
Huss
Veteran
I Just use a spin on metal vented hood from eBay. $5. Never got hung up on having to source an OEM one, doesn't make any difference to the pics.
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
I've bought two OEM hoods, one for the Zuiko 35 f/2 and one for the nikkor Ais 28f/2.8 - both were causing vignetting. Ended up buying others from shorter focal lenghts (28mm for the 35 and 24 for the 28mm) in order to work well.
Dpingr1
Established
Small camera, in great condition, with great quality lenses, with aperture priority AE, that you can get right now. You're really describing a Pentax ME Super. They were made as recently as the early 1980s, were never intended as pro cameras (not aggressively used and abused, like Nikon F's), the SMC lenses are inexpensive and superb, no mercury battery issues, and they really don't come any more compact. Best thing is, you can buy a top condition kit for waaaay under your budget.
AlexBG
Well-known
I don't but I do on any other camera I have ever had that has that as an option and it's how I like to shoot. My X-T3 is my main camera.
I'm not a fan of the M3 as a camera for me but it was my grandads and the photos I make with it I like as much as any other camera I've used. I will never sell it so I might as well use it.
tbhv55
Well-known
Alex, it really seems as though your stated requirements point toward the ME Super. The MX is excellent, but if you want small-and-light, and aperture priority, then the ME Super is one of the stand-out choices.
My recently-acquired ME Super cost under £40, including a 50mm f/1.7. The camera isn't perfect, of course (it's ~40 years old!), but it's in very decent condition. What's more, even if it fails, I've still got a nice 50mm lens - which I can either use, or sell and recoup a few quid. I consider that to be quite a good 'punt', for a £40 outlay!
Just my twopenn'orth, of course.
AlexBG
Well-known
Is the me super less than other cameras for a reason or just because it doesn't have Nikon or Olympus written on the front?
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
I have the ME and Nikon and Olympus. They are just different systems with different ergonomics really. They are all very good. One day Hollywood will make a movie with the super villain using a Pentax ME and the price of the camera will reach stratospheric heights.
The only problem with the ME can be dirt under the ASA dial, that can give underexposed pictures at times but it is easily fixed.
Here are a couple of pictures taken with the ME and the Pentax 35f2.8. The 50f1.7 is a great piece of glass.
Ste_S
Well-known
I think there's an element of that, and also Pentax seemed to sell a lot of these back in the day which makes it plentiful used now.
The ME Super also misses a couple of features that put it on a lower tier (at least for me). It doesn't have exposure lock, and the max ISO its meter can handle is 1600. Those may, or may not, matter to you. It also uses two buttons for shutter speed instead of a dial, which may put some people off.
tbhv55
Well-known
I think that could be a factor, but I believe there are still quite a good number around (it was in production for six years!), so I suppose supply-and-demand comes into play, too.
I suspect that I might have got lucky in getting mine for less than £40, but I've seen them at prices anywhere between £40 and £100 9with a lens), so that's still not overly expensive. Buying a 40-year old camera is always going to be something of a gamble (which, of course, applies to all brands), but if you buy carefully, you should get something reasonable, and if it does fail, the outlay isn't too painful.
tbhv55
Well-known
HHPhoto
Well-known
Have a look at the Nikon FA.
It offers even more than the FE2, but is cheaper on the used market. It is mostly overlooked, and not affected by the market trend towards the FE2.
The FA offers AMP metering in addition to the centre weigthed metering. And in addition to manual mode and aperture priority also shutter priority and programe mode. It has also a much better / smoother shutter release and a much better vibration dampened mirror. It also has a little integrated grip for better ergonomics.
Overall better value than the FE2.
Cheers, Jan
AlexBG
Well-known
I was just reading about the FA so funny you should say that. Seems to be like the me super, gets overlooked a bit.
nickthetasmaniac
Veteran
Another vote for the ME Super if you simply must have AE, otherwise another big vote for the MX. Eitherway, they're tiny, beautifully made, and have phenomenal viewfinders.
For lenses I'd either go the SMC Pentax-M 50/f1.4 or 50/f1.7 if you want something smaller. Both can be found pretty cheap.
The 40/f2.8 pancake that Huss loves is a decent lens, but you pay much more for it's uniqueness than it's performance.
I would be cautious going down this route. I shoot both Pentax M42 and K-mount bodies, and occasionally use my Takumars on my bayonet bodies. It can be done, but needing to manually stop the aperture down every time you want to meter or shoot gets old pretty quick...
Not sure what you mean, the Takumar's were almost all M42 screw-mount. The only ones that weren't were the budget 'Takumar Bayonet' lenses that came out early in the life of the K-mount. These were very different lenses and share little more than the name...
For lenses I'd either go the SMC Pentax-M 50/f1.4 or 50/f1.7 if you want something smaller. Both can be found pretty cheap.
The 40/f2.8 pancake that Huss loves is a decent lens, but you pay much more for it's uniqueness than it's performance.
I would be cautious going down this route. I shoot both Pentax M42 and K-mount bodies, and occasionally use my Takumars on my bayonet bodies. It can be done, but needing to manually stop the aperture down every time you want to meter or shoot gets old pretty quick...
Not sure what you mean, the Takumar's were almost all M42 screw-mount. The only ones that weren't were the budget 'Takumar Bayonet' lenses that came out early in the life of the K-mount. These were very different lenses and share little more than the name...
HHPhoto
Well-known
The FE2 is currently very "trendy" among very young film shooters. That has lead to significantly increased prices.
I am using both the FE2 and FA.
Honestly, the FA is the better camera. More refined than the FE2.
If you have any questions about these two, just let me know and I will help.
Cheers, Jan
retinax
Well-known
Ah you're right, I misremembered - I thought the first K series were also labelled "Takumar" - they're unicorns here, I've only ever seen one in person, only M42 and M series Pentax lenses around.
If you want to got with M42 lenses (some are great, but I don't agree with someone who said they were considerably cheaper than all bayonet mount lenses - they're not), do yourself a favor and use a native body, as Nick suggested. Spotmatics are sweet, but not very small. Early Pentaxes and some Fujicas are smaller. Budget for a CLA. But I personally would go for a bit more modern lenses for color.
nickthetasmaniac
Veteran
Same in my neck of the woods, hardly ever see the original SMC Pentax (K) lenses...
I agree, all of the highly regarded Taks have been pricey for a while, and even the slower examples (28/F3.5, 35/F3.5 etc) are going up now...
Yep, I use a couple of SV’s for my Takumars, and they’ve a very classy bit of design and engineering. Certainly make the Spotmatics feel a bit clunky in comparison...
HuubL
hunter-gatherer
Ditto here. I've used Canon's and Oly's, sold them and bought back Leica R's. Really great camera's and the lenses are on par (the same) as your Leica M glass. They're partially based on Minoltas, but those are great too. See above!
David Hughes
David Hughes
Can I really get a good Leica R (without Zeiss bumps on the back) and the fast 50mm lens wanted for under 300 quid? An R5 like that would suit me fine but going by the prints all the others are OK.
Regards, David