Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,531   Posts: 1,572,576   Online: 1181
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by Someonenameddavid View Post
    The MX, in my opinion, is the last in the line of the Spotmatics (it feels more "classic" than the K1000)
    I agree with this 100%. An MX sitting next to a Spotmatic looks nearly identical, just strangely much smaller.

    I have a pair of black MX's, that I bought from the original owner who was a professional photographer. She purchased two complete MX systems when she graduated from school. I bought the whole lot off her, which included the power winder, the M 50/1.7, M 28/2.8 and a 135. The kit also included a pair of Metz 45's. The all-manual MX makes a nice match to an automatic flash like the Metz, and seems a perfectly sensible way to shoot professionally. With the winder attached, the MX is still amazingly small but much improved ergonomically.

    These MX's are in nice condition. "Professional use" seems to have shown up in one of the bodies' rewind shafts being slightly worn, but otherwise both cameras are without issue and look like they are 5 years old, not 30 years old.

    It's good to know about the good meter in the MX. I have hesitated to rely on an old in-camera meter, but when I do the exposures are accurate.
    My other camera is a Pentax

  2. #22
    Pumalite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Here & Now
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,078
    MX hands down
    " A loving and caring heart is the beginning of all knowledge " ~ Thomas Carlyle ~

  3. #23
    PDH
    PDH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    520
    Overweek I was clearing out my storage closet and found a pile of my old New Photographer mags from the 70s to the eary 80s when I was still working as a PJ. I was stuck by the number of ads in the mid to late 70s for Minolta, Olympus, and Pentax compared to Nikon and Canon. In the late 60s and early 70 there were a number of PJ who used Spots, but after the shift to the K mount I dont recall seeing many Pentax K, Ms or LX. Nikon and Canon were the standard of the trade. I had a couple of Spots and a set of lens which I bought while still in college and held onto even after I moved to Nikon. I thought about a MX and ME set, but at the time I was able to rent Nikon lens when I needed an exotic lens, so I bought the F3 instead. I still have all my M42 gear, and use my Spots on occassion. If an Mx is as rugged as a spot and in good condition will last for decades to come.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    873
    Quote Originally Posted by BobD View Post
    Oops -- you are correct. The MX came first. The "X" in both model names was meant to position both cameras as "pro" models.
    Actually it was a triple X . . .


  5. #25

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Near Tavistock, Devon, on the edge of Dartmoor.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,051
    The Pentax M series bodies are so small that taking a spare body isn't a problem. I'm coming around to thinking that I'd really hardly want to bother with a true point and shoot when an M plus 40mm pancake lens is such a compact and versatile combination.

    Why so relatively few MXs? I'd guess it's because so many like myself were bowled over by the prospect of automation (but later realised the error of our ways!)

    Steve

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    54
    Images
    8
    I recently purchased an MX for £59 with the 50/1.7 lens from a dealer with 3 months guarantee. There was another one in stock at the same time. The attraction for me was to have a camera with only basic controls and no battery dependency (except the meter, and battery-less meters of that period are probably not dependable now).

    No way will I be selling mine, as it is special, whereas I suspect the ME is just another example of a 35mm SLR with too many buttons, and more likely to be sold.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    82
    That reminded me, I was on the lookout for a Pentax pancake lens and forgot all about it. I have an Olympus pancake, but it just isn't the same without the tiny MX.

  8. #28
    PDH
    PDH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    520
    I recall that one of the monthy, I think it was Pop Phot tested the pentax pancake and found it be one of the sharpest lens they had ever tested. I dont know if Pentax followed up with a AF version or not.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    211
    Yes, Pentax followed up with the autofocus DA 40 Limited. (Probably the least expensive of the Limited lenses.)

    It is badged as a digital-only lens (DA) but there are reports that it nicely covers the full 35mm film frame. Not sure if there are any real optical drawbacks to using the DA 40 on a film body. It sure would be an amazing mate to the Pentax MZ-S.
    My other camera is a Pentax

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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