Pentaxians... Any out there?

I had both too and they are both great. I kept the Olympus, never bonded with the MX. In the other hand, the ME is the camera I use with my Pentax lenses, I like the ME more than I liked the MX.

om1mx.jpg



IMG_8772.JPG
 
p.giannakis said:
I had both too and they are both great. I kept the Olympus, never bonded with the MX. In the other hand, the ME is the camera I use with my Pentax lenses, I like the ME more than I liked the MX.
Click to expand...

I am partial to ME Super...since that is what I have. And very few Pentax lenses. the MX sounds like it is a great camera.
 
hap said:
Isn't the 43 1.9 an FA lens? And about 600$?
Click to expand...
Yes, an FA Limited; B&H shows it currently at $596.95. Back in 2007 when I got mine B&H had it for $469.95. I got it for $380 from a guy in Vancouver BC who'd had it for 2 weeks and decided to change camera systems. A favorite lens!
Have not used it on either of my MX bodies though. Just the MZ3, K20D, K-3, and K-1
 
Yes, got mine for much less. Great lens, rendering reminds me of the 45/2 Planar (Contax G.) The feel with manual focus is excellent, unlike a lot of AF lenses.
 
AAlfano said:
I've never even held an MX, but I had an OM-1 for a while and, while it's a nice camera, I felt like I could never get a really good grip on it because the self-timer lever was exactly where the tips of the second and third fingers of my right hand needed to be. The above picture illustrates the problem. Also, the OM-1 relies on the obsolete 625 mercury battery. They can be converted to use modern batteries, but that is something you never have to worry about with Pentax.
Click to expand...

I had my local tech adjust the meter in my OM1n. From memory it added a couple of bucks to a regular CLA...

I did like a lot of things about the OM-1, though. I liked the shutter speed ring around the lens mount, as if you get used to it you can set your shutter speed by feel without looking at a dial on the top plate (of course the MX tells you the shutter speed in the viewfinder so not that much of an advantage for the OM-1). Also, the OM-1's film speed setting dial on the top plate is much larger and easier to see than any other manual focus SLR I've tried.
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, they're two of the things I like/liked least about the OM.

The lens area always feels very crowded, with the shutter ring, focus ring, aperture ring, dof button and lens release button all competing for limited real estate. After quite a few rolls I still haven't got it down to muscle memory.

The ISO dial puzzles me.. To me, moving the shutter control to the lens ring seems like a great opportunity to de-clutter the top plate on a very small camera. Instead, Olympus repurposed the traditional shutter dial as an iso dial, which at most needs to be changed once per roll. Does it really need such a prominent position?

They're both great cameras, but if I was going to buy one or the other, I'd buy an MX.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I'd happily recommend either :)
 
nickthetasmaniac said:
...
The ISO dial puzzles me.. To me, moving the shutter control to the lens ring seems like a great opportunity to de-clutter the top plate on a very small camera. Instead, Olympus repurposed the traditional shutter dial as an iso dial, which at most needs to be changed once per roll. Does it really need such a prominent position?
...
Click to expand...

Perhaps Olympus re-thought that as well, since on the OM-2(n) they put the very useful exposure compensation dial there.
 
I will be sending Eric Hendrickson a black Pentax MX next week for CLA.
Is this the camera that gets my daughter to finally try film photography?

Chris
 
I'm a rangefinder guy, Leicas. But it somehow seems that my grab-and-go camera, the one that sits waiting by the front door, is my MX with the 43 Limited. The focal length is perfect, the lens renders beautifully, the finder is enormous and bright, and the combo is no larger, really, than a Leica. The SLR viewing is more versatile for times when I don't know what I'll encounter. And the MX is tough as nails and an ergonomic joy. We won't even discuss the anxiety of taking a Leica worth thousands of dollars out into a harsh environment! No such anxiety with the Pentax.
I have three of them, two black and one silver, and keep a close watch for new adoptees, but it seems that finding a nice one is getting pretty difficult. Either they're all getting long in the tooth, or they've been "discovered", or both.
And I've just discovered the 645. Why is there no rabid cult surrounding this camera? It's everything I want and need from medium format; the Hassie with the 645 back is gathering dust and might just get put out to the KEH pasture.
Seems to be a theme here... The high-end, elite cameras with all the cachet sit idle while the Pentaxes get used, and deliver the goods! I've always felt that Pentax was the "sleeper" brand, mostly ignored and unappreciated.
 
Chris—If you get that black MX back from Eric and your daughter isn't into it, let me know and maybe we can work something out!


Retro-Grouch—I hear you. I picked up my first Pentax cameras (a K1000 and a Spotmatic) because they were so cheap but now I like them so much that I use them almost as much as my Nikons. In fact I'm occasionally tempted to sell my Nikon film gear and go all in on Pentax M42.
 
A client from where I work gave me her old K1000, it's in really great shape, with the 50/2 and a Sears 80-200/4. I could get top dollar for it, as K1000's are disproportionately expensive in the current market. But I don't want to do that - seems disrespectful, for one, but for two, I really like it. An MX or ME might be better in many ways, as well as smaller, but this K1000 is so obviously well taken care of, it would be hard to find something else with the same condition.
 
I bought my K1000 for $50 about three years ago before prices on them went nuts. It came with a 50mm f/2 SMC-M and a 135mm f/2.5 Takumar Bayonet. (I had been looking for a telephoto for my Nikons and the K1000 with lenses was cheaper than any decent telephoto I could find for my Nikons.) I ended up not caring for the 135 so I sold it for about $20. The K1000 with the 50 (as well as a bag, cable release, and a few filters) only cost me about $30 net. I do like the simplicity of the K1000 and having just the one K-mount lens. I'm resisting the urge to buy more K-mount lenses as I already have pretty complete M42 and F-mount systems.
 
I have an LX that works beautifully but it seems that the Pentax I grab most frequently is my K1000. It is simple to use and amazingly reliable. I have owned it since 1984 and I could literally shoot that camera in my sleep. In fact I have shot it in my dreams a few times. I know exactly which way to turn the aperture ring of the 50/2. I know which way to turn the shutter dial. I can tell just by looking at the metering needle whether or not I am one or more stops over or under exposed. And the best thing is that I can use practically any K-mount lens that has ever been built before the digital age came around. The only downside is the shutter. It is loud so it isn't always appropriate in certain venues.
 
A recent thread about any clean Rolleiflex cameras being thin on the ground, got me thinking of my Pentax cameras. Generally, these cameras were not over used (as Rolleiflex(s). Mostly consumer cameras, so possibly a good deal because people bought them to take photos of there children and after that just Christmas. So if you pick the correct models you can get a perfectly running mint camera for very little.

Of course cult cameras are not included.
 
This may be true of 35mm Pentaxes, but the 645, designed for professional use, seems to be abundant in near-mint condition. Considering that these were targeted at pro wedding photographers (weddings shoots are like combat zones, but with better food), I'm puzzled but happy that there's so much nice, mint equipment available cheaply.
 
charjohncarter said:
A recent thread about any clean Rolleiflex cameras being thin on the ground, got me thinking of my Pentax cameras. Generally, these cameras were not over used (as Rolleiflex(s). Mostly consumer cameras, so possibly a good deal because people bought them to take photos of there children and after that just Christmas. So if you pick the correct models you can get a perfectly running mint camera for very little.

Of course cult cameras are not included.
Click to expand...
That may be true of Pentax cameras in general, but black ones are hard to find in good cosmetic condition. A little brassing is cool, but it seems like most of the black Pentax cameras on ebay look like they were tied to the back of truck and dragged over ten miles of bad road.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom