Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,197   Posts: 1,531,412   Online: 866
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: pentax MV

  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,951
    Quote Originally Posted by cliveh View Post
    I think the K1000 was the best Pentax ever made.
    Yeah right! It's about the least expensive Pentax when it was introduced. So I can say that Pentax cheated their customers with other models for giving them what were worse than the K1000 and charging them more.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    280
    I just find the K1000 over-rated. It's hair shirted minimalism for the sake of it.

    Pentax had already offered the KM, which had a self timer and DOF preview. The K1000 borrowed heavily from this model but simply didn't bother with two very useful additions.

    The KX is much, much better than either. The metering is more accurate, it has MLU, and the viewfinder tells you more. I just wish I'd known they existed in the 1990s when I bought a K1000 as it was the "beginner" SLR (in a pre-Internet age all I had to go on were magazines, which didn't often publish a list of old cameras with their relative features). The KX is a tough, completely manual camera but just makes your life a little bit simpler.

    I regularly see KXs (and even K2s) for the same money or less than some K1000s. Unless you're a collector then why bother with a K1000?
    Matt

  3. #13

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,951
    Quote Originally Posted by PentaxBronica View Post
    I just find the K1000 over-rated. It's hair shirted minimalism for the sake of it.

    Pentax had already offered the KM, which had a self timer and DOF preview. The K1000 borrowed heavily from this model but simply didn't bother with two very useful additions.

    The KX is much, much better than either. The metering is more accurate, it has MLU, and the viewfinder tells you more. I just wish I'd known they existed in the 1990s when I bought a K1000 as it was the "beginner" SLR (in a pre-Internet age all I had to go on were magazines, which didn't often publish a list of old cameras with their relative features). The KX is a tough, completely manual camera but just makes your life a little bit simpler.

    I regularly see KXs (and even K2s) for the same money or less than some K1000s. Unless you're a collector then why bother with a K1000?
    I couldn't agree more! My guess is that most people who think the K1000 is such a great camera weren't aware of its existent in 1976 when it was introduced.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Montgomery, Il/USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,025
    Most beginners weren't interested in spending the extra $$$$ and wouldn't have known better until they had some experience under their belt.
    Heavily sedated for your protection.

  5. #15
    kb3lms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Reading, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    694
    Images
    5
    +1 for the P30. Have two and they haven't let me down yet.

    As for the opinion about Ricoh, I bought my oldest daughter a "bargain" rated A-100 from KEH about 2 years ago and it has been a workhorse. Would not hesitate to get another.

    -- Jason
    All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.

  6. #16
    Pioneer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    980
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by PentaxBronica View Post
    I just find the K1000 over-rated. It's hair shirted minimalism for the sake of it.
    Hmmm. That is an interesting opinion. A guy picks up an M3 and shoots it and he is an artist but if a guy picks up a K1000 it becomes "hair shirted minimalism." The K1000 is arguably more versatile than the Leica and cost a heck of a lot less to buy. Face it, what more do you really need to take a picture?

    If I needed a self-timer then I wouldn't use the K1000. If I needed a depth of field preview the K1000 wouldn't be my first choice. But I rarely use either of those features, so the lack of them hardly bothers me. It just means there are fewer things to go wrong.

    But if you do need a very, very reliable manual camera that can use just about any of the very wonderful lenses that Pentax has manufactured over the years then the K1000 is terrific choice. I bought mine in the early 80s and have never regretted it. It has shot pictures steadily and reliably since I bought it and it has never let me down. Let me repeat that. It has "Never Let Me Down." If I had film in the camera, and my exposure settings were correct, I always came away with a picture. I have owned a number of other cameras since I bought the K1000 and I cannot make that statement about several of them, even a couple of Leicas that I spent a heck of a lot more money on.

    Based on my personal experience with it this camera is hardly over-rated. To the contrary, I find that lots and lots of people are more than happy to under-rate it at every possible opportunity. I can certainly agree that the K1000 is not for everyone. There are lots and lots of very nice cameras in the world so take your pick. Some want auto exposure options. Others want a different meter readout. The lack of auto focus turns some people off. A few people want mirror lock up. But it still is a very capable, very tough, camera. Just because you don't want one, don't run it down.

    Like a lot of other people, I seriously doubt that I have learned enough to outgrow my K1000 yet. And since I am a very slow learner it is likely that I never will.

    After all, everyone knows, it is the perfect students camera.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Near Tavistock, Devon, on the edge of Dartmoor.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,024
    Quote Originally Posted by PentaxBronica View Post
    I just find the K1000 over-rated. It's hair shirted minimalism for the sake of it.
    When the K1000 first appeared it was a marketing ploy as basically a de-featured KM. Nothing wrong with it, but I can't see why anyone would buy one when for less money they could have a KM with DOF preview and delayed action. Being essentially a bayonet-mount version of the Spotmatic-F, I'd put the KM as probably the most UNDER-rated Pentax 35mm SLR, up to and including the M-series (much beyond that I lost interest in Pentaxes when they became too plasticky).

    Steve

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    280
    My only complaint with my KM is that the light metering is a bit off the wall. If you set the film speed "incorrectly" it pulls the metering back into line, the K1000 seems to be the same. Meanwhile the KX and K2 are spot on. I'm not sure if this is normal - I have seen others mention a need to adjust it this way.

    The K2 also has a fairly dramatic advantage in that it offers timed exposures up to eight seconds (or up to thirty seconds in auto mode). Now, fifteen seconds and longer I can happily do with my watch and a cable release, but two or four seconds is very tricky to get spot on (and more crucial that you do, as an extra half second will count for a larger percentage of the exposure than it would with a thirty second one). I've grown to enjoy taking long exposure shots at night, or of flowing water. Both of which the K2 is much better at than a K1000 thanks to its MLU, self timer, and electronic shutter.

    And before lines about "not outgrowing" and their rather strange undertone that you shouldn't have more features until you've somehow earned them come in, I can quite happily shoot with an SV and Sunny 16. I just think the K1000 is bought by a lot of people who've absorbed the idea that it's the only way to learn to take decent photos, when they'll learn just as much with a P30 and have more to spend on film.

    Going back to long exposures, weirdly this is something the MV/MV1 are actually quite good at. Both have the undocumented ability to give exposures up to thirty seconds or so, and providing you're sensible with aperture settings they'll produce a very pleasing image.
    Matt

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    820
    Quote Originally Posted by Pioneer View Post
    Hmmm. That is an interesting opinion. A guy picks up an M3 and shoots it and he is an artist but if a guy picks up a K1000 it becomes "hair shirted minimalism." The K1000 is arguably more versatile than the Leica and cost a heck of a lot less to buy. Face it, what more do you really need to take a picture?

    If I needed a self-timer then I wouldn't use the K1000. If I needed a depth of field preview the K1000 wouldn't be my first choice. But I rarely use either of those features, so the lack of them hardly bothers me. It just means there are fewer things to go wrong.
    Good point. In an old Leica ad, Leica calls the users of the M3 as intelligent users to try and stem the tide of SLR migration!

    Lack of self timer then use an external type . . .



    You want DOF, then set the aperture, unlock the lens and turn until it is almost off.

    As Crosby, Stills & Nash sang, "if you can't be with the one you love love the one your with"

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    319
    The K1000 is overrated in the sense that since it has become famous for being no-frills to the point where it commands more $$$ than the premium model KX (honestly, how does the addition of a self timer/DOF preview go wrong?)

    Also, can't see a self timer, DOF preview, AE automation, etc "getting in the way"

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin