p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
Pan, just clicked on your site for the first time and love it! And it kills me to see how little you spent on some of those cameras..
Thanks Huss,
I am planning to update it tomorrow 😀
Pan, just clicked on your site for the first time and love it! And it kills me to see how little you spent on some of those cameras..
If you're not using the camera's metering, then losing TTL metering doesn't matter... it won't affect you. 🙂 Pentax K and M bayonet lenses (and later ones having an aperture ring) communicate the set aperture to the MX mechanically, and the camera then can calculate the exposure based on a wide-open reading. Of course more recent lenses having no aperture ring aren't usable on the MX.hi, i have a MX with a vry nice 40f2.8 lens. Can i know what happens if i use the k-mount to M42 adapter, what does it mean by losing "open aperture metering" ? Also, how feasible is it to use M42 lens ? I have read of compatibility issues.
thanks
raytoei
nb. I currently am not using any battery but Sunny 16 rule.
OK, well I have to make a couple of honest observations about the MX and some other well loved SLR's at the risk of getting hell rained on me 🙂
I have always found it hard to see the meter LED's on the Pentax MX. They blank out from my peripheral vision, or whatever, I do not know. They also seem a little dim. This was a very early use of LED's in a 35mm film camera and maybe the technology was not quite there yet. I hate to say it, because the camera is such a little gem mechanically (and good looking too), but the viewfinder overall can be a challenge to use in my experience.
Not so with say the OM-1 which has a breathtakingly bright finder for a vintage SLR, or newer SLR's like the Contax SLR series from the 80's and 90's. I think one reason the K-1000 was a vastly bigger hit than the MX was not only it's reasonable price, but it's finder optics and meter; easy to see and super simple. The K1000, while larger than the MX, is still quite light and is large enough to grip easily, yet not a heavy beast of a camera like say the Nikon F2. Of course the K1000 was not a complete "system" camera, but neither was the MX really.
OK, well I have to make a couple of honest observations about the MX and some other well loved SLR's at the risk of getting hell rained on me 🙂
I have always found it hard to see the meter LED's on the Pentax MX. They blank out from my peripheral vision, or whatever, I do not know. They also seem a little dim. This was a very early use of LED's in a 35mm film camera and maybe the technology was not quite there yet. I hate to say it, because the camera is such a little gem mechanically (and good looking too), but the viewfinder overall can be a challenge to use in my experience.
Not so with say the OM-1 which has a breathtakingly bright finder for a vintage SLR, or newer SLR's like the Contax SLR series from the 80's and 90's. I think one reason the K-1000 was a vastly bigger hit than the MX was not only it's reasonable price, but it's finder optics and meter; easy to see and super simple. The K1000, while larger than the MX, is still quite light and is large enough to grip easily, yet not a heavy beast of a camera like say the Nikon F2. Of course the K1000 was not a complete "system" camera, but neither was the MX really.
Ha, just got one back from an overhaul this morning. Silver, not black.
Great viewfinder. If manual metering works for you, go for it. For everyday use I prefer the ME Super, which has aperture priority metering and is slightly smaller. The ME Super's mirror action is also quieter. But I keep the MX for manual metering or for simple guess-metering shooting.
Have you considered the SMC-M series 50mm 1.4 or 1.7? Well-built, a bit smaller, great lenses. The Pentax 50mm f/1.7 might be one the best lenses of its type for almost no money. Just cruise Ebay for an ME, ME Super, or Super Program; many have one of the better lenses on it and you can just toss the body.
I couldn't have said it better and agree with everything Dan says. I prefer my ME Super and then the MX with either the Pentax-M 50mm 1.7 or Pentax-A 50mm 1.7 to my Leica M3. Smaller, lighter, easier use and great results. I can't justify keeping so much money tied up in the M3 with Summicron when the results from the Pentaxes are so good and I prefer them in use, with preference to the ME Super. BTW, the aforementioned lenses are better than the SMC-K 55mm 1.8, but not better than the SMC Takumar (screw-mount version) 55mm 1.8
I am lucky enough to have received a free MX with 50mm F2 and 100mm 2.8 lenses. Beautiful viewfinder, and the 100mm lens is most excellent. It is an excellent choice if you want a simple, light and competent camera. SMC lenses are impressively small.
However, the shutter on mine is quite loud, with a metallic ping. I would say it is as loud as my Minolta SRT-101. When I watched Youtube videos about the Pentax MX I was under the impression that the shutter was not very loud, so maybe my camera needs a check-up.
Other than that, my only problem with the camera is that it is almost too small for my hands (which are normal sized). I prefer slightly larger cameras like Minolta XD11 and Leica M.
I am lucky enough to have received a free MX with 50mm F2 and 100mm 2.8 lenses. Beautiful viewfinder, and the 100mm lens is most excellent. It is an excellent choice if you want a simple, light and competent camera. SMC lenses are impressively small.
However, the shutter on mine is quite loud, with a metallic ping. I would say it is as loud as my Minolta SRT-101. When I watched Youtube videos about the Pentax MX I was under the impression that the shutter was not very loud, so maybe my camera needs a check-up.
Other than that, my only problem with the camera is that it is almost too small for my hands (which are normal sized). I prefer slightly larger cameras like Minolta XD11 and Leica M.