Huss
Veteran
I have a Minolta XK with both the AE and AE-S heads. A physically impressive camera that is a lot of fun to use, but just feels a little ungainly, a little off in the haptics dept.
I read up on the XE series, and decided to try one out. I actually 'won' two at the same time - one in much nicer cosmetic shape than the other. First off -wow this thing feels so much better designed in hand than my XK. Everything made sense and felt just right. Plus the film wind lever is the best I've ever experienced in an SLR. Better than any of my Nikons including the floppy levered F3s, better than the XK, I dare say better than my Leica Ms...
All seemed swell until I tested the meters. In both cameras, bought from different people, they showed an overexposure of 3 stops compared to my XK (all using the same lens and ISO setting) and a hand held meter, pointed at an avg grey scene.
What is interesting is I remembered seeing a couple of XE ads on ebay that mentioned the meters were overexposing by a lot.
So... is this common (ignoring my experiences)?
I read up on the XE series, and decided to try one out. I actually 'won' two at the same time - one in much nicer cosmetic shape than the other. First off -wow this thing feels so much better designed in hand than my XK. Everything made sense and felt just right. Plus the film wind lever is the best I've ever experienced in an SLR. Better than any of my Nikons including the floppy levered F3s, better than the XK, I dare say better than my Leica Ms...
All seemed swell until I tested the meters. In both cameras, bought from different people, they showed an overexposure of 3 stops compared to my XK (all using the same lens and ISO setting) and a hand held meter, pointed at an avg grey scene.
What is interesting is I remembered seeing a couple of XE ads on ebay that mentioned the meters were overexposing by a lot.
So... is this common (ignoring my experiences)?
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
Somewhere else I've read Minolta's SR-1s is your absolute favourite -- or was this just regarding elegance? -- Not unlike my taste, I'd say the SR-7 (last version) combines a maximum of elegance and usefulness.
Re exposure meters of the XE-1/XE-7/XE: well, they're CdS, *and* over 40 years old now, I wouldn't expect accuracy. And: one cannot know -- e.g. -- what kind of batteries did the previous owners use, and whether improper batteries etc. may have caused something?
Re exposure meters of the XE-1/XE-7/XE: well, they're CdS, *and* over 40 years old now, I wouldn't expect accuracy. And: one cannot know -- e.g. -- what kind of batteries did the previous owners use, and whether improper batteries etc. may have caused something?
Huss
Veteran
The Sr1s is the most elegant looking SLR. But it feels delicate in comparison to an XE, especially the extremely long throw film wind.
The AE head on my XK has the same CDS cells, and it is still accurate. I put fresh, correct batteries in both the XEs, but no good.
The AE head on my XK has the same CDS cells, and it is still accurate. I put fresh, correct batteries in both the XEs, but no good.
jajong
Established
Hi Huss, if you are inclined to try a bit of cleaning of variable resistors and the like, try page 41 of the repair manual ( http://www.suaudeau.eu/memo/manuels_rep/reflexes/minolta/xe_service_manual.pdf ) and see if cleaning helps. With this camera you can lift off the penta cover (plastic) without major surgery.
Maybe it is wise to check if the auto exposure is working correctly by running some film through them. It may just be the meter indication that is out.
Cheers,
Jan
Maybe it is wise to check if the auto exposure is working correctly by running some film through them. It may just be the meter indication that is out.
Cheers,
Jan
Huss
Veteran
Thanks for the tip Jan but these have been sent back as the sellers gave me a refund. But good to know if needed when I get another.