The Pentax MX

wjlapier said:
I had a Super ME and thought that was pretty small as SLR go. How does the Olympus OM 1/2/... compare to the MX sizewise?
Click to expand...

The MX definitely feels like a smaller Spotmatic, and it feels more robust than an OM1 and to me the viewfinder is better. The OM1 reminds me of the Leica M3 (obviously in SLR form) I suppose each to his own.
 
nikon_sam said:
I also have two black body MX's with the Winders attached...I bought them both brand new back in the early 80's...I bought a chrome MX for our daughter many years ago...she doesn't use it and it's currently hanging out in her former bedroom...I dare not sell because as soon as someone would buy it she'd ask for it...I have no plans to sell the black ones either...great little cameras...I ran a lot of B&W film through both...

21261110279_e1165ce074_c.jpg
Click to expand...

Very nice! I've been looking into those winders but they are very hard to find. Plenty out there for the ME series, but not the MX.
 
Huss...
I have a Pentax ME SE with the ME Winder II on it...that winder and the MX winder look very similar but the ME winder is a better design, especially in the battery department...one of my winders has a stripped battery door but it stays in place...
You're right that you don't find too many of the MX Winders for sale...and when you do most are junk...
 
nikon_sam said:
Huss...
I have a Pentax ME SE with the ME Winder II on it...that winder and the MX winder look very similar but the ME winder is a better design, especially in the battery department...one of my winders has a stripped battery door but it stays in place...
You're right that you don't find too many of the MX Winders for sale...and when you do most are junk...
Click to expand...

Sam, I don't the ME Winder II works with the MX? Only with the electronic shutter Pentaxes, no?
 
The MX was my first SLR (with a very sharp Pentax M 50mm F/1.7). I have fond memories of it, but I have since completely stopped shooting 35mm film. My Pentax 6x7 with a TTL finder is more or less the same camera, only an awful lot bigger, heavier and noisier...

Cheers!

Abbazz
 
p.giannakis said:
I think its younger sibling - the ME is smaller.


IMG_8772.JPG



Between the OM-1 and the MX, the MX is smaller


om1mx.jpg



Having had both, they both are amazing cameras but i kept the Olympus.
Click to expand...

I went the other way, kept the MX. But I gave the OM to a friend I value.
 
kshapero said:
Fell in love with these rigs 2 different times ( I wanted to love them) but the quality control just wasn't up to Nikon FE/FM level, which I consider the standard bearer of that era (late seventies and eighties). That being said if you find one in very good condition, you will have a ball.
Click to expand...


Interesting experience. Personally I have owned three MX's and also have several friends who shoot with them, and none have had any issues (except a failed light meter, which is probably to be expected on a camera of this age...).




Anyway, here's the MX and its big brother, the LX.




And alongside my M2.

 
nickthetasmaniac said:
Interesting experience. Personally I have owned three MX's and also have several friends who shoot with them, and none have had any issues (except a failed light meter, which is probably to be expected on a camera of this age...).




Anyway, here's the MX and its big brother, the LX.




And alongside my M2.

Click to expand...

Love those stark beauty shots!
 
So today I was checking out the monthly flea market at Pasadena City College. I pretty much go there to buy records, see if anyone has any photography stuff, and just have fun.
Today there was hardly any photo gear, but on one random table I saw one of those metal briefcase style camera cases, the ones with the foam cut outs to fit gear.
Walking closer I saw the words Pentax on the camera. It was a full ME Super (black!) set with motor winder. The camera didn't turn on even though the batteries were there (but they may have been dead). The winder's battery chamber had the remnants of a massive leak. But inside the metal hood of a tele lens was this!



Like new condition, and I just happened to have my MX with me. Meant to be, plus the dood sold it to me super cheap. Of course I already ordered the 28 3.5...

This lens is tiny. With this system RF cameras do not have a size advantage if you pick the right lenses. Anyway, finished a roll of film, will see tomorrow how all this stuff works.
 
Nice, I always meant to pick up that lens to go with that camera. I'm sure it would be a good combo.

A few from that MX and 40mm....

32332392337_7f513901fa_c.jpg


47274300861_7f8eaae148_c.jpg


Shawn
 
Huss said:
Sam, I don't the ME Winder II works with the MX? Only with the electronic shutter Pentaxes, no?
Click to expand...




Huss,


The Pentax Winder ME II is for Pentax ME Super and ME. Also fits the ME-F, MG, MV-1, Super A, SuperProgram, Program A, Program Plus, P5 and P50.

The coupling is very different between the MX and ME bodies, the electric connectors and mounting screws are in similar if not exact positions.
The finish is also slightly different...I prefer the finish on the ME Winder.
 
Thanks Sam.

If anyone is interested, this company makes grips out of nylon (I assume) for all sorts of cameras in a bunch of different colours. I just ordered one for the MX.

https://www.cameradactyl.com/buttergrip

It was $25 including shipping, vs the $75 for the grip that I bought a while back for my F2 (and made by the same company for the MX in Prest400's pic above)
 
Huss,
I have the same lens but the Pentax-A version...probably got it at a thrift shop and paid very little for it...I'm using it on the Sony a6000...it is a small lens.
 
Huss said:
If anyone is interested, this company makes grips out of nylon (I assume) for all sorts of cameras in a bunch of different colours. I just ordered one for the MX.

https://www.cameradactyl.com/buttergrip

It was $25 including shipping, vs the $75 for the grip that I bought a while back for my F2 (and made by the same company for the MX in Prest400's pic above)
Click to expand...

The grip - I did not order this colour!

 
My buttergrip (!) showed up. Very nice in black, super light weight but very solid feeling as it has been carved from a solid piece of nylon type material. Very comfortable to handle, much more so than the $75 grip I bought for my Nikon F2 (and shown above on Prest's MX)



Great value at $21! And my MX just became nicer.
 
Oh yeah, that 28mm 3.5 in the pic above? It's going back to the seller in Japan. The mint/like new condition failed to mention a bunch of scratches on the rear element. Even though the seller claimed no scratches. Good thing I found the 28mm 2.8 at the flea market!
 
Russell W. Barnes said:
Is there much, if any, difference optically between this and the Takumar SMC 28mm f3.5 lens? I have a Pentax MX and a Pentax-K adaptor to allow the Tak and other M42 lenses to fit. Haven't shot off any film with this lens yet though.
Click to expand...

The optical construction of the M28/f3.5 (6 elements/6 groups) is different to both versions of the Takumar 28/f3.5 (7 elements/6 groups and then 7/7*). The first version of the Tak is also much bigger (58mm filter vs 49mm). None of these have a particularly good reputation (by Pentax standards), but I can't comment on image quality as I haven't used them.

The K28/f3.5, which came between the Taks and M and has a stellar reputation (one of the highest rated lenses on Pentax Forums) has a different construction again - 8 elements/7 groups. To be honest, I'm curious why they went to so much effort with this lens... These can still be found quite cheap.

Pentax Forums has optical diagrams for all of them:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/S-M-C-Super-Takumar-28mm-F3.5.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-M-28mm-F3.5-Lens.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-K-28mm-F3.5-Lens.html

*Corrected, thanks Colton.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom