Barry Kirsten
Established
I've just bought a cute little Industar 50-2 and am surprised by its small size. It got me wondering what might be the smallest M42 SLR body that would make a pocketable partner with this lens. Obviously it couldn't compete with a Barnack combination, but is there something smaller than the Pentax SV, for example, which is the smallest of the M42 cameras I have?
Nitroplait
Well-known
Put a M42 to K adapter on a MX and it is pretty tiny.
santino
FSU gear head
If you only had the Industar in M39 then you could look for an original Zenit. Not genuine M42, but via adapter possible is the Praktica B200. No knowledge here about the smallest, genuine M42 body.
The Fujica ST-801 is my smallest M42, LED based meter, manual exposure. The ST-701 uses a mechanical meter. Both use Silicon Photo-Diodes.
leicapixie
Well-known
Pentax-M series! All way smaller than an Leica-M film series.
The ME, ME Super, Mv and mechanical MX are really small.
I used the winder on MX was so small, caused cramp in my hand.
Never fitted battery into it..for power wind.
Never knew Russian lens could fit M42. ?
You will need the adapter from M2 to "K" mount.
The ME, ME Super, Mv and mechanical MX are really small.
I used the winder on MX was so small, caused cramp in my hand.
Never fitted battery into it..for power wind.
Never knew Russian lens could fit M42. ?
You will need the adapter from M2 to "K" mount.
Doesn’t the adapter negate the small size of the lens he’s trying to use?
lynnb
Veteran
Thank you Lynnb. So these adapters are more like the ltm to m size. Sorry, I’m trying to become familiar with m42.
MrFujicaman
Well-known
You're looking for a Vivitar XC-2, XC-3 or XC-4. They are very close in size to the Olympus OM-1 etc.
The M42 adapters for Pentax K are flush with the lens mount, and add no additional lens length.
Oren Grad
Well-known
+1. These are Cosina-made cameras also marketed as Cosina CSR/CSL/CSM.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
I agree that the Fujica ST series are about the smallest, slightly smaller than a Spotmatic. But the real tiny option would be an M series camera. Using an M42 Takumar with the adapter to K mount, you could have an ME Super or MV set to aperture priority and use the manual stop-down tab on the lens to create a tiny AE point and shoot.
Phil Forrest
Phil Forrest
Oren Grad
Well-known
The late ST605, ST705 and AZ-1 models are the smallest of the lot, smaller than the SV and pretty close to the Cosina/Vivitar already mentioned.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Yes. You can see from the various mount register listings that the M42 mount register is identical to Pentax K mount register. I seem to recall some fiddly technique was necessary to remove the adapter from the mount so you could then fit a K-mount lens after having fitted the adapter for M42 lenses.
It's a little different from the LTM->M-mount adapter ... M-mount was defined as being a thin half-mm or so shorter than LTM so as to make space for a spin-on adapter per lens, which is why you can adapt LTM lenses to M-mount but not the other way around. Pentax used identical flange registers for both M42 and K mount ... conjecture: I suspect so that they could re-use the same lens body designs if they chose to, and also because they could use many of the same components for the shutter/mirror mechanisms. Whether they actually did I do not know because there are other fundamental differences in the operation of the lenses' autodiaphragm mechanism between the two mounts.
G
Oren Grad
Well-known
That's right. I have the original Pentax-branded M42-K adapter. To get it off the camera it's necessary to squeeze a fingernail into a tiny slot to release a sharp-edged retainer clip. Not something I want to do any more often than absolutely necessary.
Normally I don't recommend the adapter as you lose the auto-diaphragm function of those lenses that have it. But if the iris in the Industar in M42 mount is strictly manual to begin with, then one of the M-series Pentaxes with the adapter is certainly also worth considering.
In the initial set of K-mount bodies, the KM was essentially a Spotmatic F with the new mount. But the aperture-control linkage was indeed entirely different - push-pin in the screw-mount cameras, swing-lever in the K-mount cameras.
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
That was my first thought...lens would need a manual setting for the aperture unless it always stops down..l
johnf04
Well-known
Barry Kirsten
Established
Thanks everyone for your thoughts. The three M42 cameras I have are Pentax Spotmatic and SV, and a Fujica ST801. I hadn't really compared them for size, but you're probably right, Oren, the ST801 is a tad smaller than the SV. It's borderline: the ST801 is 5mm taller, but 8mm less in width than the SV. It's a very nice little camera with an excellent meter. I have been thinking of using it for my Russian lenses anyway, as I already have a Helios 44 M-7, and a Jupiter 9 in transit. It was idle curiosity that prompted my question. I know the Pentax MX is very tiny and it would be a nice combination, but I don't like using adapters unless necessary.
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
Have you thought about some of the early M42 cameras such as the contax D or the ones from Pentacon from the same period. Of course no lightmeters but some of them are inspired by the contax rangefinder sizes.
Here's what an M42 adapter looks like on a K-mount body. It essentially converts the camera into an M42 body. I have Fujica bodies but prefer using the ME Super for the faster shutter speed, smaller size, and nearly life-size viewfinder, as well as aperture priority.
The recessed tabs to remove the mount from the body are visible, it's actually simple to do. But ME Super bodies are quite inexpensive, so I have two bodies, no reason to remove it.
