To me, Pentax has always been a prestigious brand, maybe not in recent years, their slr cameras were second to none, and on seeing this video, I'm currently looking for a Pentax model, as I want to shoot film again. Many thanks for excellent overview of the these great cameras.
I had an MX when it came out, and I longed for an LX. I changed over to the Canon EOS system and stuck with Canon, but won't ever forget how much I loved using the gorgeous little MX.
I owned a black MX but a good friend of mine owns a pair of LX bodies along with MX and others 35mm film Pentaxes along with a few 6x7s. A diehard Pentax fan to say the least! We have been Pentax fans since 1979 when we met. I have been an ASAHI fan for 50+ years.
I got the pentax of my father, an me super. My dad was a war reporter, I will post some of pictures from Vietnam war. You might know him, Richard D. Boyle was the protagonist of "Salvador" f Oliver Stone
Nice video! I’m a Pentax fan and shooter myself! I think the LX deserves an in depth review on its own. It’s a highly advanced camera, for instance it’s one of the few (maybe the only?) that meters the light off the film plane, and can therefore adjust exposure midway through a shot if the light changes. I don’t think the LX is really a budget model though, it sells for the same as a Nikon F3 but in my opinion is a far superior camera. The MX is excellent and small, but the ME Super is even lighter and smaller, but still built very well. The K1000 is another classic Pentax, but their cult status has pushed up the price somewhat.
Richard G Yeah I believe so. The metering is more advanced than the F3, the LX is weather and dust sealed, excellent build quality, lighter weight and has both step-less electronically controlled shutter in Aperture priority but has a full range of manual shutter speeds available should the batteries / electrics fail. The closets Nikon model would be the FM3A which in my opinion is the greatest Nikon SLR ever made, but it came years after the LX and still doesn’t have the weather sealing or off the film plane metering.
Michael Epstein Well Michael, they are both excellent SLRs and each has its own merits. I shot my F3 yesterday and it's hard for me to believe there is a 35mm SLR on the planet "far superior" to it. Or more solid in the hands and pleasing to use. It's a masculine beast... and a Nikon. Good shooting, Michael.
Great video, great cameras. Few remarks from me: - There were versions of KX that accepted motor drive (very rare though) - LX was their only attempt at proffesional market, but only if we talk 35mm. Pentax 6x7 system was their professional offering for the medium format, in addition to 'prosumer' 645. - Prestige is relative :P
Thanks so much for your feedback. Yes, of course, we are aware of the medium format systems. I was referring to the 35mm cameras. There will also be a review of the Pentax 6x7 at some point. :)
@@AnalogInsights Another interesting point is that Sebastiao Salgado used a Pentax 645 for a long time, and has switched to digital Pentax 645. Nick Brandt uses a 6x7 Pentax. Both men are renowned for their compelling images. I'm amused by those who disdain Pentax's 35mm cameras and lenses; they only demonstrate their lack of knowledge.
Love your videos! I’m a film shooter and have owned a few SLR’s. A Yashica, a Canon AE-1, an Olympus OM-1, and most recently, a Pentax K1000. The OM-1 was my favorite until I got out to shoot with the K-1000. Something about it. Just so satisfying to shoot with. Somehow just right. I know you’ve done videos on its predecessor, the Spotmatic, but I would love to get your impressions on the iconic K-1000 too!
I've owned all three cameras. The KX was my favourite. It had a great focusing screen, far better than the MX screen, and overall handling was better. The LX was lovely to use also. It had an electrical fault though. Still have the KX, the other two have gone. The MX became unreliable in the end, with mirror & shutter issues. KX was faultless! - Its match needle metering was the best design too.
100% Agree on the KX. I owned all 3. In the end, I have 2 KX and 1 LX. I sold all my MX's. The KX seems to be the most robust of the 3. Both of mine are still running like new. In my opinion, it is the king of mechanical cameras. I have the LX. It is very nice on the hand and it feels better built than all 3 with tighter tolerances. However, it is not as robust as the KX. I had the sticky mirror issue which I have fixed myself. All the MX's I owned had a problem one way or another.. like light meter issues, shutter speed indicator issues, mirror issues, etc.. Overall, I really enjoy using the LX but I feel it won't last as long as the KX and that makes it my favourite followed very closely by the LX (or vice versa depending on the day).
@Tristan C I too enjoyed, and loved my LX, it was a gorgeous camera! I ended up selling it to buy a Pentax 6x4.5cm - which was fantastically reliable! Pentax lenses though, are, in my opinion, the finest for my taste.
@@rollingnome great stuff! How is that working for you? How is the viewfinder experience? I'm thinking of buying a 645N but I'm just curious if it'll will just end up on the shelf because of its size. I shoot digital medium format (Fujifilm GFX) and I'm already finding it hard to take that with me.
I have owned, and used, a lot of different 35mm SLR's from 1970 to 2000. The LX's were the best by far. The OTF metering, especially for dedicated flash use, was great. They all paid for themselves. By the way, the glass was superb.
Excellent review. My first proper camera back in the early 1980s was a K1000, and then an MX. Still have the MX, and an ME Super now. Great cameras - compact and nice to handle.
Thank you for such a comprehensive review…I have been considering jumping into film for quite some time and have appreciated all of your videos on Leica, Olympus…but I think your insight and comments at the conclusion are leading me to Pentax for my first film camera. Much thanks and gratitude for all of the efforts you put into these videos.
I've been in some pretty "prestigious" Art Museums, and watch a crowded of VERY WEALTHY people being wowed by photographs I know were taken with Pentax cameras! It's not so much the "Box" that you use to get the pictures, but the creative Talent of the Photographer! So yeah, a "Work Horse" 35mm, in the hands of a true Artist, will bring home "the Money Shot" every time.
This cannot be emphasized enough. Photographers who denigrate brands other than their favorites tend to show their cameras a lot more than their pictures.
Thank you! I've always adored Pentax and so it's great to see the brand getting some love. Not too much though please, I need the lenses to stay nice and cheap :'D
The Pentax LX is my favourite 35mm film camera. The shots taken with the tilt/shift lens and look-down viewfinder were awesome! I for one would love a video just on that set up. Thanks for all your work in doing these vids!
how have u been able 2 service ur LX? I bought mine recently in excellent cosmetic condition but suffering from severe "sticky" mirror. I reckon it developed a fault early on & fell into disuse in storage over the decades. Technicians don't wanna "go near them" .. & i can vouch 4 that as my 1st attempt 2 have it repaired & serviced was assessed as unrepairable (by them @ least). The mirror reflex & shutter unit need stripping down & i was told parts no longer available. I will ring a couple of other techs & am considering reaching out 2 Pentax Japan. There could be a "clever dick out there" with LX bodies 2 cannibalise🤞.
@@jocknarn3225 yes the black foam mirror damper gets sticky over time on some LX cameras. Hopefully the gunk didn’t get into your shutter mech. I think it could be carefully scraped off and replaced with a more modern foam piece that could be cut to fit. I think David Hancock’s UA-cam vids talk about that.
If you ever need a mirror lock facility on the K1000, KX or MX?.. a tip of the trade from way back when I sold these,, Mount your camera on a tripod or similar , tap the shutter button GENTLY.. (this takes practise) and the mirror wil lock up WITHOUT the shutter firing.. Great where minimum vibration is required. :)
I love and thoroughly enjoy watching your videos and this was another excellent one. I currently own both the MX and the LX and have had the KX in the past. I think the LX has come to be acknowledged as a prestigious camera by people who really know cameras, but the KX (and the even more impressive K2) have still not received the respect they deserve. Keep doing what you guys are doing! I’m a recent subscriber and look forward to all of your videos!
Wonderful overview and review! Love the videos, you strike a great balance of technical detail, personal commentary and photo demo! Keep up the solid work from Canada!
I was a professional wedding photographer for 20 years that used MXs and 35 50 65 200 lenses I loved it because of the lightness and durability and simplicity.
Pentax was very aware of the ergonomic possibilities of camera design. In use, the controls fall easily to hand and the viewfinder information is available in such a way as to keep your attention on the focusing screen and the composition. It was one of the prestige brands with presence at 6/7, 645 and 35mm. The spotmatic was a professional press camera as was the SV. Their lenses and coatings were used by NASA. The MX is such a perfect walk around camera, I was never without mine. It fitted in the hand and could stay there all day. The ease of use meant you could operate it quickly and intuitively. The focussing screens are brilliant and very fine. The MX is rather like a Nikon FM but smaller. It had a professional system behind it. Pentax cameras are designed to be used out and about and are rugged; great for travel and wildlife. I have used it in the studio, in auditoriums. In the desert, up mountains. There were several top photographers using Pentax, it was attainable and excellent. Canon and Nikon had a big worldwide support networks for professionals and that alone made them the main choices of professionals. Nikon were more sturdy than Canon and Canon were more cutting edge. Pentax’s and Nikon’s are easier to find in working condition than Canon.
It would be interesting to see a comparison between all the great manual system cameras (LX, F1, New F1, Nikon F F2, F3, Minolta XK) you seem to have access to all of these and it would be interesting to compare them all in different circumstances. BTW love your videos - you give us really what film photography on youtube was lacking
@@kiwipics Isn't it (and the New F1) right after the LX in his reply? It is confusing that Nikon and Canon have the habit of giving their cameras similar names; I believe Canon is the main culprit.
The KX is my favorite of the three. Bigger body for easier handling/grip. Has more functions than the MX and less electronic failures of the LX. It's the best K series; even better than the K2.
Congratulations for your very nice reviews and clear explanations ! I own an MX since 20 years still working fine. I found that if you tap the shutter button you will discover the mirror lock up function ! So MX also as it, but is a "hidden " function :D ! thank you for your nice work !
@@AnalogInsights yeah you have to flick the shutter button lightly with your finger and it trips the mirror stage but not the shutter stage then you can use it as a MLU. It's obviously not something pentax intended but since the shutter and mirror are on different stages someone figured out that it can be done. I practiced without film in the camera and have gotten to where I can do it every time without wasting any frames. Thats the risk you take when you first start doing it, you might accidentally trip both stages and waste a shot.
Another delightful video. Great to see Pentax 35mm featured - I've an old and battered K1000 and a number of Ricoh/Vivitar clones with the k mount - all reliable and a pleasure to use.
I don't own one, but am impressed with the finder options. the reason I do not purchase, is for reliability. There is a technician who repairs but the warranty I believe is less of a time period than other pentax cameras he repairs. I believe the electronics are more fragile than other models. Otherwise, I'd be all over this model.
Were it not for the PCB malfunctions popping up more and more on these, it would be my *most* favorite 35mm camera. In a perfect world it still is, but I don't trust mine - it's let me down plenty of times since the issue started (even after two repair attempts by Eric Hendrickson), whilst the KX and MX never have (except when I abused them and deserved to be let down).
Analog Insights Good to see some later Pentax cameras. They are, however, from different generations. The first K-series included the K2, KX, and KM which is very much a bayonet version of the Spotmatic F; KX added more viewfinder information. The KX and KM were relatively short-lived, as the M-series - MX and ME - came out, they were phased out, leaving the K2 and its motorized version K2DMD as the top models. Soon enough both of these K-models were phased out as well, as the ME spawned other versions, which are of course quite well known. The LX was named for Pentax's 60th anniversary; Geoffrey Crawley pitted it against the Nikon F3 and Canon new F-1 and found it to be superior. The K1000 was really a bit of an oddity as Pentax wanted to carry on building a Spotmatic-derivative, to be sold at a low price as a stop-gap, so it was a stripped-down KM, which developed it's enthusiastic following. By the way, many of Pentax's "firsts" turned out to be seconds or thirds... but that said more about their advertising agency than Pentax themselves...
One of my favourites is the Pentax Kx. The best camera they made for film apart from medium format was the Pentax Mzs which I used on weddings. A fully specced prpfessional model.I have many Pentaxes and I enjoy them all.
All these, _and_ the K2 DMD, were professional, if defined as being tough and having system accessories (incl MD, databack) and full info viewfinders. In Danilo Cecchi's book he calls the MX _The Little Professional_ and gives it a whole chapter. The short-lived KX _was_ going to get the accessories (a prototype MD was made) but it was overtaken by changing fashion. In 1970 most pros _didn't want any_ auto, but by the late 70's that had changed so the manual/auto K2 was upgraded to a pro spec as the K2DMD. Pentax covered the small body craze with the MX, but pros did not really want small bodies. Pentax finally got it right with the LX, successor to the K2DMD and the best manual focus 35mm SLR ever IMHO, only the Nikon F3 got close. They never had great success in the pro market because they came too late, but that was the aim of these cameras. I don't get the prestige thing because Pentax made the best film camera of all time : the 6x7 - and still make medium format cameras today. In the 1980s they were one of the big five, and today they are up there with Canonikon as the maker of a superb and bullet-proof full frame DSLR, of which it is a shame that most people have never heard of. They have a much smaller slice of the market now, but so do Hasselbald and Leica - and do they lack prestige? I have had all of these Pentaxes except the KX :-)
Great, informative video, as always. I just spent 7 days in Colorado and decided to take my Pentax MX to document our trip. I mostly used my Pentax 35mm F2, with my second choice being my 50mm F1.4. Can't wait to get the photos back. This is an awesome camera, it sure why it doesn't have a bigger following.
Nice video. I've been a longtime Olympus OM-1 user before switching to digital, but I did a time in high school where I was in charge among other things of the photo club and was therefore the dark room mentor. The club owned a Pentax MX, so I got to use it, and honestly the MX was the closest thing to my OM-1 I ever shot with (and this is a huge compliment). The only real difference was the mirror lockup feature, present on the Olympus and lacking on the MX. When I went digital, I found the Olympus offer lacking in the early 2K's, so I remembered the MX and went with a Pentax APS-C before Olympus got their act together and finally released the E-P1. Since 10 years I've switched to micro four thirds, so back to Olympus. I've tried and tested all the other big names, and the only other brand I'd consider shooting is Pentax. Real photographer's cameras.
Ordinosaurs & retro computers Do you find a mirror lock up feature of use on a 35mm camera? I see the point on something like a Pentax 67, but I don’t feel like I miss it on my MX.
@@mdjmurray : it's useful in macro with still subjects at a high reproduction ratio, and in bulb mode for light painting for instance. I agree it's not a showstopper though. But the OM-1 mirror kicks like a mule, and with the dampening material getting goey over time, if you want to be safe for critical shots, that's a plus.
The MX was bound to be close to the OM-1, the OM-1 inspired/forced Pentax to introduce the MX, realising the fashion was changing to smaller cameras. The whole Pentax K-series was suddenly dated (but the K1000 was salvaged). The MX had aperture in the viewfinder which OMs could never do back then because of the quirk of the lens aperture ring being out on the far end.
Always great, pro videos on pertinent topics. K1000 was the first 35mm camera I used in high school photo department. We’re indestructible and sharp! Thanks for your highly intelligent reviews and theory. But where is Jules? I miss his silent presence.
Thomas Jacobson Thanks so much for your kind comment. I really appreciate it! Jules was on a longer vacation when we shot the last videos but will be part of the next video(s) again. I miss his silent presence, too. :)
Something not a lot of people know is that the pentax MX does have a mirror lockup function, as it probably shares a lot of its mechanics with the KX, they just remove the button to activate it. It's still possible to lock up the mirror on the MX: you have to touch the shutter button like if it would be hot, giving it some taps till you give one strong enough to engage the mirror, but not enough to trigger the shutter! It sounds difficult but once you learn how to do it it's super easy! As I remember this trick works on the KX too, even if it has the button.
I bought my MX new in 1982 and for most of the time since it has been my favourite camera. Last year I acquired an Olympus OM1n and Om2n and can compare these with the MX and also a Nikon FE that I have had for about 8 years. The MX is the smallest and has the edge in viewfinder information as it has an LED traffic light indicator for exposure. This beats the Olympus and Nikon cameras which only have match needles. In the dark you cannot see the reading! Nevertheless the OM and Nikon cameras have a very slight edge (imo) in build quality over the MX. Whilst the FE feels very smooth to operate, the best of the three marques, it has a flaw in that the meter is only on and the shutter can only be fired when the film advance lever is partially out, ie watch out with your eye. The MX meter is the best of the 3 in terms of operation as it switches on when you depress the shutter halfway and the shutter can be fired with the advance lever flush to the body. It also has the best viewfinder info for both shutter speed and aperture. On top of this the M series lenses are superbly built and compact. This contrasts with the Nikkor lenses which feel quite sloppy to operate and cannot match the Pentax dampened feel. The OM lenses are better than the Nikkors in this respect and feel very good to operate apart from the aperture ring which is not as decisive as the K or M series Pentax. To summarise I would heartly recommend the Pentax MX to anyone wanting a quality 35mm mechanical film camera with access to a superb range of extremely well built lenses and that only uses a battery for the meter. I was however surprsied with the comment that the LX is very reliable and inexpensive. Please see reviews on UA-cam covering the major reliability problems of the LX which also normally costs about three or four times that of the MX or OM1.
Richard stevenson Thank you so much for your elaborative comment and comparative review. This is really interesting. To be honest, I wasn’t aware of the reliability issues regarding the Pentax LX, so thanks for pointing this out as well.
Its a pleasure Max. Comparing these cameras leads me to conclude that my ideal camera would have the superb feel and build quality of the OM1, the wind on mechanism of the FE and the interchangeable viewfinder/info, meter operation and lenses of the MX. I have not used an LX but from what I hear this specification of mine seems to sum up this camera. I think I have just persuaded myself to start the search for a good LX!
Just wanted to thank you for your extremely insightful and helpful comment. I just posted this question above before scrolling down the comments. Really appreciate this answer. Cheers
@@AnalogInsights The reliability issues come with age. After 20 years or so, some cameras start to have problems with the electronics. Mine is much older and works fine. The sticky mirror is also just from age; any camera should get a CLA anyway by then, and the replacement mirror bumpers are also better.
I'm lucky enough to own a Pentax 28mm f3.5 SMC K (not the M version) which sits on my KX. 52mm filter thread. Sharp from edge to edge. It's a real beauty!
I have just re watched this video.I like it very much as I like all your videos. I have an MX and a KX and I enjoy using them. I have had the KX for longer than I can remember, it is a favourite camera, I like it's weight and quality plus the sensory side of woperating it. I have made amny beautiful ptographs with old Pentax cameras and lenses.
Trivia fun fact: About that SMC. Zeiss invented lens coatings in the 1930’s but partnered with Pentax to further develop multi coating and to develop the technology to integrate it into lens manufacture. Zeiss abruptly dropped Pentax and switched to partnering with Yashica. Was that because Pentax was not all that enthusiastic about multi-coating, or is it that Pentax saw the potential and wanted independence to gain a greater competitive advantage for their own lenses? We will never know the answer to that, but it needs to be noted that Pentax (before it was even using the Pentax name) was involved with Zeiss in early coating technology research and application to manufacturing techniques. BTW, I still have my MX. It is on the shelf in front of me. I regard it as one of the greatest cameras ever made. Most people bought the ME Super, but the smart people bought the MX.
Is that a fact or a rumor. Most likely Pentax developed the 7 coating layer and Zeiss bought a license until the patent ran out. www.aohc.it/testi.php?id_testi=59
Michael Russo The relationship between Zeiss and Pentax was a lot deeper than a lot of people realise with each company being a lead partner for different aspects of development. Zeiss had invented lens coatings in the first place but the Japanese companies, for whatever reason, had greater resources in terms of both research money and engineering talent and so both company’s brought a lot to the table. Pentax was on the ascendant at the time and had a “let’s shoot for the moon” attitude, while Zeiss’s camera brands were struggling and they had a more “protective” and “go cautiously” attitude. Zeiss, for example, had absorbed Voigtländer in the 1954-64 time period and Voigtländer’s last glory was introducing the world’s first zoom lens for stills photography in 1959 in partnership with the Zoomar company. But Zeiss let that partnership wither away instead of going all-in on what would prove to be the future of photography. The reason that Pentax abandoned the Spotmatic line and went all-in with the new K-mount is complex. There was a need to go to bayonet-mount anyway, because customers favored it, but it also appears to have been a Zeiss partnership idea with both company’s intending at the time of development to introduce a common mount as basis for a new Pentax/Zeiss camera ecosystem. It seems that it was Zeiss that got cold feet when it realised how big the investment was going to be, however Zeiss was an active participant in the K mount project for at least two years. This is demonstrated by the SMC Pentax 28mm f2 (the early variant often nicknamed the “Hollywood”) which was designed during 1973 and 1974 by Erhard Glatzel at Zeiss and released independently by Zeiss as the Distagon 28mm f2 T*. Another evidence of the Zeiss connection showed up after the partnership had ended, so I don’t know if it was an older design from their Zeiss days that took them a long time to bring into production, or was just a matter of respect for their history with Zeiss, was one of their best ever lenses, the SMC Pentax-M* 300mm f4 released in 1981. The star on the letter M is easy to miss, but it is a very Zeiss thing, and it appeared on no other Pentax-M lens. The history page you linked to is very interesting, although told from a Pentax perspective with a strong emphasis on the SMC. It ignores the fact that multi-layer technology was already in widespread use prior to 1971, starting with 2 layer coatings in 1943 developed by Zeiss, and that Minolta had a head start over Pentax with a 5 layer process that was being mimicked by Nikon by 1970. And there was no mention of Canon’s independent SSC process. The article also seems to not acknowledge the co-operation between Zeiss and Asahi which had existed since the 1950’s and gave Asahi access to Zeiss research. This does not diminish Asahi’s accomplishment in being able to patent a process for 7 layer coating in 1971. This quickly fed back to Zeiss, who introduced T* coatings in 1972. As I suggest in my first comment, I think that the breakdown of the Zeiss/Pentax partnership is probably as much to do with the Pentax desire for competitive advantage as it was a case of Zeiss caution. Unfortunately, the truth about what was said in corporate meetings at both company’s is unknowable, but it is fascinating to speculate based on what we do know about what products came to market.
Michael Russo Zeiss may well be over priced, but through the first 7 decades of the 20th century they were at the cutting edge of camera design. The distagon, planar, and sonnar designs which those great Pentax lenses were based on were all invented by Zeiss. Lens coatings were a Zeiss invention. Hasselblad lenses were Zeiss lenses with Hassy branding. People usually don’t realise that Schott glass, which is the World’s leading developer of photographic glass was started by Zeiss and is within the Zeiss umbrella. To acknowledge the great things achieved by Nikon, Canon, Leica, Pentax, Panasonic/Olympus, Minolta/Sony, Mamiya, Rollei, is very reasonable because they have all done very great things. But to state that Zeiss is simply a status symbol betrays an amazing lack of knowledge about camera history or the role that Zeiss has played, and continues to play in partnering with other manufacturers. The Zeiss/Asahi partnership was very productive for both company’s. The name Pentax was a Zeiss brand which Asahi purchased from Zeiss in the 1950’s (early Asahi cameras were called Asahiflex before the purchase of the Pentax name.) and of course, the best thing Pentax ever did - develop the K mount was hatched as a partnership project with Zeiss, which Zeiss ultimately, and very stupidly, backed out of leaving Asahi to launch it on their own. In the 1960’s and 1970’s Zeiss was their own worst enemy, and Pentax was the scrappy newcomer taking over the cutting edge, or at least mixing it with Canon. Of course it could be argued that Pentax is now repeating history in that, like Zeiss they have been ravaged by competitors, mostly Canon and Nikon in their case, and they are no longer the major force they once were. Hopefully, like Zeiss, they can let their non-photographic businesses carry them through, so they can survive long term as a niche player. They have been hugely important historically, and I would love to see them rise again.
Great video, guys! And the subject was a treat for me. Pentax, together with Nikon, one of my favorites brands of photo gear. In the last year the MX was the camera that I used the most. I also enjoy the ME Super, but miss the DOF preview... Oh, love the Afga APX too. Cheers
I have Pentax and Nikon. One nice thing is that their aperture and focusing rings turn the same way, so I can switch with no problem. And I have Bronica, which has the same directions as well (and bayonets on and off the same direction as Nikon). Just a happy coincidence, as I did not use it as a criterion, but it actually is very important, as I never turn something the wrong way by mistake.
Great cameras bought lx years ago never let me down great meter had some great shots from it dont use it so much now with digital cameras lx was on par with my digital camera with ease if not better sometimes shame you don't hear about pentax as much now never sell it and all the lenses solid as a rock
I own the Pentax MX-1. Very compact . The MX-1 is aperture priority which makes it great for street photography w SMC Pentax-M 5omm f/2 Lens. I also bought 2 additional metal adapters to use Yashica/Contax lenses and M42 mount lenses.
Great video. I find the older M42 mount Asahi Pentax cameras more solidly built, more affordable, and the Takumar lenses are some of the best lenses mechanically and optically, including Leica/Contax/Nikon. May be a future video ??
I luckily picked up a Tamron 135mm F2.8 with a Pentax M42 adapter on it for $6. I've noticed when I used the M42 lenses on my Pentax MX, the aperture setting is off by one stop in the preview window. Do you have the same issue? Not that big of a deal, if you're aware of it.
The 60's in photography are sometimes called 'the golden era of Pentax'. During this decade Asahi Optical was THE most prestigious Japanese manufacturer and bigger than Canon and Nikon combined. Some SMC Takumar lenses were rebranded by elite camera manufacturer from Switzerland - Alpa. Zeiss Oberkochen, after their failure to compete on 35mm SLR market, sought a partner in Japan for joint efforts, and contacted Asahi. This cooperation didn't last long - in the end, Zeiss made the deal with Yashica - but gave birth to the K-mount itself and some exquisite lenses like 15mm/3.5 with aspherical element (very hard to manufacture back then) and 28mm/2.0 (also known as 'Hollywood').
The aperture settings on M42 camera/lens combinations varies due to modern battery voltage difference, and/or due to different generation/type of M42 cameras or lenses. Best bet is use a light meter, (or "light meter app" in a smartphone), till you establish a satisfactory baseline for each camera/lens that you have. Good luck.
Thanks for your video. It would be nice to point out that all K-mount manual lens of Pentax (and M42 lenses, like the Takumars, with a simple adapter) will work great on a Pentax DSLR. Thus, a "win-win" situation if one wants to shoot both film and digital. My SMC K 50/1.2 lens is excellent on the K-1 ... and it's damn good on film, too. Cheers, J
I really enjoyed Greg introducing his Pentax MX! The usual good review, tasteful video, nicely edited. I like Pentax and especially the MX and LX, I have two of each "Just in case". I can say after repairing some lenses that Pentax didn't shy away from plastics and adhesives in the "A" series lenses, the quality of those is nothing to write home about.
It is true... but up to a certain point. While the SMC Pentax lenses (and to a lesser degree the Pentax-M ones) have a great build, the top-of-the-line Pentax-A objectives are also very well made. It's just the cheaper ones that are questionable. One example: the 2/50mm has a weak plastic diaphragm ring, while the 1.4/50mm is more or less comparable to the M version. Considering everything, the best A and A Star lenses are still a great choice for digital Pentax shooters who like to use manual lenses. The electric contacts allow to use any exposure mode and also use P-TTL flashes
When it comes to film cameras , what is all too often overlooked is the fact that Pentax was rated far ahead of Canon . Most photographers wanting to upgrade to a pro 35 shortlisted Nikon , Pentax and Olympus , pretty much in that order . I those days , the Canon 35mm rangefinders were very popular as they represented good value for money for general amateur photography . Nobody I knew in the late sixties to the late eighties indicated any kind of burning desire to buy a Canon. They were pretty much in the second tier of the SLR market together with Minolta , Miranda , Yashica and Mamiya . The press photographers used Leica rangefinders almost exclusively due to their legendary ruggedness and reliability , although in the mid to late seventies , Olympus became popular due to the lower bulkiness and weight of the Olympus system . Canon made its mark in the digital era and it was certainly better with digital than was Pentax. So the younger digital natives when looking at film cameras , went for Canon. The inverse was true of myself ; when I migrated to digital in 2010 , Pentax was far behind so naturally I opted for Nikon based on film camera reliability and performance . Canon was not even considered by me as I rated Canon on the film camera experience . I am now looking at getting a Pentax K70 in place of my Nikon D3000. I prefer shooting film and my C330 , Yashica D and 1967 Pentax Spotmatic is in regular use . I also use a Pentax MZ 5 - N fairly often. As humans , we make decisions based on what we grew up with so the general feeling that the film Canon was better than the Pentax is simply not the case . With digital , Canon made its well deserved reputation .
Great video. Just started shooting with a Pentax MX that was given to me a while back. I have tonnes of other cameras from Zenit E to om2n, from Holga to Hasselblad 500c/m and Rolleiflex 2.8e.
would you upload a well made video detailing the shutter sounds of the three cameras? something like this: /watch?v=rHE0_jmB-F0 , it is the best example.
Not sure about the "prestige" associated with Canon or Nikon compared to Pentax. The misconception brought in by DSLR marketing. Canon was always cheap sneaking in plastic wherever they can and their fd lenses were a disgrace compared to Pentax lenses. Also, Canon and Nikon were basically making "Leica" clones, before Asahi Pentax actually invented the modern SLR. So, Pentax is definitely more prestigious in that regard. Pentax cameras were quite iconic, the Beatles owned them, while Canon/Nikons were run of the mill photo journalist cameras.
Back in 1990, I had an opportunity to buy practically brand new Pentax LX for only 600.00 Canadian Dollars. That was a lot of money for me back then but I knew that brand new Pentax LX was around $ 1200.00. I don't think that anybody ever used that camera, it was wrapped in original plastic, it had a smell of brand new camera and not a scratch on it. It seems like most people in North America had some kind of Pentax basic gear back in 1980's and 1990's but nobody knew about Pentax LX. I still regret not buying that camera. One of the best film SLR ever made!
The KX also came in a motor drive version; I currently own one I bought back in '75. Took me over 30 years to source a drive for it though. It used a rather impractical vertical pistol grip battery with a huge ni-cad battery.
A little surprising that some large fundamental differences with the LX were not mentioned - it is the only of the three to offer aperture-priority AE, and has a 1/2000-capable shutter. It also has a novel meter-off-the-film tech that allows for accurate automatic long exposures.
Excellent video and review. When I first saw Greg, I thought you finally took off for Hollywood, soon to appear in the gossip tabloids arm in arm with Taylor Swift.Bet she'd melt in your arms.Anyway great photos, great cameras,heading out to the New England woods to photograph leaf filtered sunlight as it strikes glistening rills, granite outcroppings, bright mossy boulders etc. All the best to you.
Ahaha, thanks so much for your comment, Steve. This made my day. Let's just say Taylor Swift is not my type. I'm more into blue-eyed brunettes. ;) Hope you had a wonderful day taking photographs in the New England woods. This sounds amazing! All the best to you, too!
Thanks for the video, but what if I asked you to choose two or three pentax cameras for me, combining mechanical and electrical features with many specifications?
My Pentax road map was K1000, ME Super, SuperA. Pentax got rather left behind when autofocus arrived which is when I changed to Canon EOS. Still lust after an LX but they are quite pricy. Still have my ME Super.
Hello Sir May you Choose two or three for me, which have most of the advantages and diversity، and It combines electronic and mechanical cameras. Thanks
Nice review. I like the old Pentax cameras with m42 mount, because I have a great collection of m42 lenses from fish-eye to tele. The are great cameras. But I'm collecting m42 and m39 cameras from all brands. Amazing stuf.
I had the MX, and would of loved to had the LX. I was only a lowly studio assistant at that time, and sadly couldn't afford the LX. I did however love my MX, which was still small even with a drive attached.
I think Pentax has it's own prestige but that didn't extend past the 1990's so by todays standards they have become somewhat obscure as a company, although they still have a diehard user base. Personally I still have my fathers stainless steel MX that he gave me in 1996 and it still works I also shoot with a Pentax 6x7 MLU, and I recon I'll be buying an LX in the near future. I also had a couple of ME Supers over the years. I liked those for the ergonomics and small form factor but they definitely weren't as robust as the MX or LX and they cost more to fix than they are worth on the used market. As far as Pentax in the digital market I'm not really a fan but many of their film cameras are fantastic. I'm fine if people want a "prestigious" brand because that keeps the prices low on these awesome vintage pentax bodies and lenses.
I love your reviews and channel. Just came across them researching getting into film and I have learnt so much. Do you think for someone shooting with modern Fuji systems but who wants to get into film for certain situations/fun/hobby etc should go for the Olympus Om-1/2 or the Pentax MX? Thanks and support from London.
Thanks so much for your comment and kind words. Please excuse my late response. Well, this is a tough choice. In my opinion, you cannot go wrong with either of them. Both systems come with great lenses and especially the two cameras you mentioned are really small and versatile. So it's really about details such as the light meter, battery availability, etc. Personally, I would opt for an Olympus OM-1 but that is really a matter of personal preference.
@@AnalogInsights No worries my friend, really appreciate your response and advice. Thank you very much for your great work and reply. Have a lovely day
It's interesting that Pentax used the very same same style for the X as Minolta used on their X-** cameras and as Fuji now uses for their X-Series cameras.
Very nice video. The background info on Pentax history have been quite unprecise though. It's been the market leader of cameras at that time and none of these 3 cameras anything else than professional tools. Quite a bit more affordable than the "expensive" players Canon and Nikon though
great video again.. I have MX but use ME Super more because of Aperture priority... BTW MX has horizontal "cloth" shutter which is really silent in comparison with metal one.. anyway good job!
I bought a K1000 and a LX in 1984 and both are in mint condition. I've since bought the K10 so I could use my old lenses. I wish film was still a used medium and old Pentax cameras where worth more...I'll wait.
You can still buy film, it is making a comeback. Tends to be expensive as not a mass market any more. Good, old, film cameras are worth a lot these days.
Wonderful! I recently acquired an MX, but it's not working as well as I'd hoped. On occasion, when I take a shot, the mirror latch stays held open, and the mirror doesn't drop back down. I've changed the seals and damper (so it's not the mirror sticking to the damper foam - shame, that would have been a nice easy fix), and have lubricated the mechanism in the lower body, however the problem still persists. Do you know if these cameras were prone to the same issue the ME Super has in which the rubber dampers in the body degrade and become sticky? My MX was stood for about 15 years unused by its previous owner, however she has looked after it meticulously so I'm certain that the issue isn't from misuse or accidental damage (it looks pristine!). The few shots Iw as able to take have come out beautifully exposed and pin sharp on the f1.8 50mm lens, so I'm pretty keen to get it working properly. It's such a pleasant machine to shoot with. The weight, feel and balance are wonderful and the controls all fall perfectly to hand. When it's all sorted, I suspect it's going to get a lot of use.
The Hat , I had this sticky mirror problem with the LX and sent it to special Pentax service in Lübeck/Germany. I never observed this problem in another 35mm Pentax camera. Maybe this service is able to help you - they are very kind. Best regards, Greg
Ian Thomas hi Greg, that does fit with what my research has turned up. It seems as though there are a lot of rubber parts on the mechanism which are prone to degrading and becoming sticky. In cameras which have been used extensively, it doesn’t cause an issue but if they’re stood unused for a long while, they exhibit this same symptom. My ME Super has done exactly the same thing and it’s going in for a rebuild this month, and the MX is in for repair once that one is done. I managed to get a roll through the MX which had about half the frames blank, but the shots which did come out we’re really quite superb. The 50mm prime that came with it is fantastic.
Hello! Amazing video!! I want and advice, between a pentax KM and a pentax MX which one you recommended me to buy. It will be my first analog camera. Thank you
@@dukenukem5768 Sorry, but this is not correct. The larger models were made by higher quality materials. Anyhow, I would neither recommend the MX nor the K2, but the fully mechanical KX or KM. All the electronic Pentax cameras will fail sooner or later and there will be NO chance for repair - just expensive paper weight.
@@ytuberization I am with you on the KX. By the way, the MX worked fully mechanically and only the meter required batteries, like the KM/K1000. However there are three different generations of cameras here. The MX was in the generation _after_ the K2 & KX, and although the KM was launched at the same time as the K2 & KX (and later re-launched as the cut-down K1000), its technology mostly belonged to the _previous_ generation, being a Spotmatic with a K-mount grafted on. The KM/K1000 had hardly any viewfinder information and had a slow CdS meter with a limited range, and was an outdated design the day it was launched (let alone 21 years later); but the sort of people who bought it didn't know or care. The KM/K1000 was designed for cheapness (without compromising solidity) for the budget market, while the MX with its full info viewfinder and its range of databacks etc was aimed at advanced amateurs and cetain types of pro. It's a matter of preference which you prefer - like some people like driving VW Beetles and wearing sackcloth, and others don't.
Pentax MG (actually just a rebranded ME) was my first SLR, wich I got as a kid. That was a neat little camera, but it tended to underexpose a bit and without possibility to set the camera manually (what was fixed on ME super) and soon started to frustrate me quite a lot. And the fact that the only 3rd party lens that I had started to fail I wanted to upgrade, so I lusted over Pentax Program A, Super A or the LX. But since good Pentax cameras was hard to get in my country back then eventually I needed to switch for another brand... Gruß
I've got all of them, accompanied by a KM and two MEs. Excellent reliable and robust cameras, but unfortunately no one is able to repair the LX anymore. The light meter is way off and the automatic does quite strange things...
I took my KX on a photo walk today after a few yrs of it sitting on the shelf. It's a joy to use and has such a satisfying shutter sound.
Yep, it's like a rifle. Very definitive sound with a solid clunk.
I just got a KX and I an struggeling to buy a battery. Which battery do I use?
The black mx is the most aesthetically beautiful camera I have ever owned. A work of art compared to any digital camera.
A black MX was the only Pentax film camera I ever bought. I later got into Pentax digital but the MX is something else.
@@boristahmasian9604 Smallest 35mm SLR.
To me, Pentax has always been a prestigious brand, maybe not in recent years, their slr cameras were second to none, and on seeing this video, I'm currently looking for a Pentax model, as I want to shoot film again. Many thanks for excellent overview of the these great cameras.
I had an MX when it came out, and I longed for an LX. I changed over to the Canon EOS system and stuck with Canon, but won't ever forget how much I loved using the gorgeous little MX.
I owned a black MX but a good friend of mine owns a pair of LX bodies along with MX and others 35mm film Pentaxes along with a few 6x7s. A diehard Pentax fan to say the least! We have been Pentax fans since 1979 when we met. I have been an ASAHI fan for 50+ years.
5D IV+ Sigma EX-DG, Hasselblad 503 CX + Carl Zeiss lenses.
I got the pentax of my father, an me super. My dad was a war reporter, I will post some of pictures from Vietnam war. You might know him, Richard D. Boyle was the protagonist of "Salvador" f Oliver Stone
Fascinating
Cool
Very cool last name
Just looked up your dad and wow. What an amazing man and inspiring life he lived. Happy to be part of the ME Super club with both you and your father.
Nice video! I’m a Pentax fan and shooter myself! I think the LX deserves an in depth review on its own. It’s a highly advanced camera, for instance it’s one of the few (maybe the only?) that meters the light off the film plane, and can therefore adjust exposure midway through a shot if the light changes. I don’t think the LX is really a budget model though, it sells for the same as a Nikon F3 but in my opinion is a far superior camera. The MX is excellent and small, but the ME Super is even lighter and smaller, but still built very well. The K1000 is another classic Pentax, but their cult status has pushed up the price somewhat.
Michael Epstein "Far superior to the F3"? Seriously?
Richard G Yeah I believe so. The metering is more advanced than the F3, the LX is weather and dust sealed, excellent build quality, lighter weight and has both step-less electronically controlled shutter in Aperture priority but has a full range of manual shutter speeds available should the batteries / electrics fail. The closets Nikon model would be the FM3A which in my opinion is the greatest Nikon SLR ever made, but it came years after the LX and still doesn’t have the weather sealing or off the film plane metering.
Michael Epstein Well Michael, they are both excellent SLRs and each has its own merits. I shot my F3 yesterday and it's hard for me to believe there is a 35mm SLR on the planet "far superior" to it. Or more solid in the hands and pleasing to use. It's a masculine beast... and a Nikon. Good shooting, Michael.
I’ve used the LX for astrolandscape photography for years and I’m still amazed at the live metering. Never a wasted frame.
Richard G Cool! If the F3 works well for you there is no need to worry about any other camera. 👍🏻
Great video, great cameras. Few remarks from me:
- There were versions of KX that accepted motor drive (very rare though)
- LX was their only attempt at proffesional market, but only if we talk 35mm. Pentax 6x7 system was their professional offering for the medium format, in addition to 'prosumer' 645.
- Prestige is relative :P
Thanks so much for your feedback. Yes, of course, we are aware of the medium format systems. I was referring to the 35mm cameras. There will also be a review of the Pentax 6x7 at some point. :)
@@AnalogInsights Another interesting point is that Sebastiao Salgado used a Pentax 645 for a long time, and has switched to digital Pentax 645. Nick Brandt uses a 6x7 Pentax. Both men are renowned for their compelling images.
I'm amused by those who disdain Pentax's 35mm cameras and lenses; they only demonstrate their lack of knowledge.
Love your videos!
I’m a film shooter and have owned a few SLR’s. A Yashica, a Canon AE-1, an Olympus OM-1, and most recently, a Pentax K1000. The OM-1 was my favorite until I got out to shoot with the K-1000. Something about it. Just so satisfying to shoot with. Somehow just right. I know you’ve done videos on its predecessor, the Spotmatic, but I would love to get your impressions on the iconic K-1000 too!
I've owned all three cameras. The KX was my favourite. It had a great focusing screen, far better than the MX screen, and overall handling was better. The LX was lovely to use also. It had an electrical fault though. Still have the KX, the other two have gone. The MX became unreliable in the end, with mirror & shutter issues. KX was faultless! - Its match needle metering was the best design too.
100% Agree on the KX. I owned all 3. In the end, I have 2 KX and 1 LX. I sold all my MX's.
The KX seems to be the most robust of the 3. Both of mine are still running like new. In my opinion, it is the king of mechanical cameras.
I have the LX. It is very nice on the hand and it feels better built than all 3 with tighter tolerances. However, it is not as robust as the KX. I had the sticky mirror issue which I have fixed myself.
All the MX's I owned had a problem one way or another.. like light meter issues, shutter speed indicator issues, mirror issues, etc..
Overall, I really enjoy using the LX but I feel it won't last as long as the KX and that makes it my favourite followed very closely by the LX (or vice versa depending on the day).
@Tristan C I too enjoyed, and loved my LX, it was a gorgeous camera! I ended up selling it to buy a Pentax 6x4.5cm - which was fantastically reliable! Pentax lenses though, are, in my opinion, the finest for my taste.
@@rollingnome great stuff! How is that working for you? How is the viewfinder experience? I'm thinking of buying a 645N but I'm just curious if it'll will just end up on the shelf because of its size. I shoot digital medium format (Fujifilm GFX) and I'm already finding it hard to take that with me.
@Tristan C Yeah, great. The 6x4.5cm is very simple & easy to use handheld. Great view finder! I love it! Don't know about the N version though.
To me the KX is the perfect manual camera, I own an MX, LX and KX, and I prefer the KX. It was my first camera back in 76.
I have owned, and used, a lot of different 35mm SLR's from 1970 to 2000. The LX's were the best by far. The OTF metering, especially for dedicated flash use, was great. They all paid for themselves. By the way, the glass was superb.
Wow.
A camera of 39 years of age and one owner !
Great video.
Thank you.
RS. Canada
Three of best 35mm cameras ever produced.
Pentax rivals Nkon F4 for reliability, frankly.
Excellent review. My first proper camera back in the early 1980s was a K1000, and then an MX. Still have the MX, and an ME Super now. Great cameras - compact and nice to handle.
Thank you for such a comprehensive review…I have been considering jumping into film for quite some time and have appreciated all of your videos on Leica, Olympus…but I think your insight and comments at the conclusion are leading me to Pentax for my first film camera. Much thanks and gratitude for all of the efforts you put into these videos.
I've been in some pretty "prestigious" Art Museums, and watch a crowded of VERY WEALTHY people being wowed by photographs I know were taken with Pentax cameras!
It's not so much the "Box" that you use to get the pictures, but the creative Talent of the Photographer!
So yeah, a "Work Horse" 35mm, in the hands of a true Artist, will bring home "the Money Shot" every time.
This cannot be emphasized enough. Photographers who denigrate brands other than their favorites tend to show their cameras a lot more than their pictures.
Thank you! I've always adored Pentax and so it's great to see the brand getting some love. Not too much though please, I need the lenses to stay nice and cheap :'D
Haha. Good one. Thanks so much for your kind comment. :)
The Pentax LX is my favourite 35mm film camera. The shots taken with the tilt/shift lens and look-down viewfinder were awesome! I for one would love a video just on that set up. Thanks for all your work in doing these vids!
how have u been able 2 service ur LX? I bought mine recently in excellent cosmetic condition but suffering from severe "sticky" mirror. I reckon it developed a fault early on & fell into disuse in storage over the decades. Technicians don't wanna "go near them" .. & i can vouch 4 that as my 1st attempt 2 have it repaired & serviced was assessed as unrepairable (by them @ least). The mirror reflex & shutter unit need stripping down & i was told parts no longer available. I will ring a couple of other techs & am considering reaching out 2 Pentax Japan. There could be a "clever dick out there" with LX bodies 2 cannibalise🤞.
@@jocknarn3225 yes the black foam mirror damper gets sticky over time on some LX cameras. Hopefully the gunk didn’t get into your shutter mech. I think it could be carefully scraped off and replaced with a more modern foam piece that could be cut to fit. I think David Hancock’s UA-cam vids talk about that.
If you ever need a mirror lock facility on the K1000, KX or MX?.. a tip of the trade from way back when I sold these,, Mount your camera on a tripod or similar , tap the shutter button GENTLY.. (this takes practise) and the mirror wil lock up WITHOUT the shutter firing.. Great where minimum vibration is required. :)
Cannot you simply activate the self timer?
KX has a mirror lock up,
I love and thoroughly enjoy watching your videos and this was another excellent one. I currently own both the MX and the LX and have had the KX in the past. I think the LX has come to be acknowledged as a prestigious camera by people who really know cameras, but the KX (and the even more impressive K2) have still not received the respect they deserve. Keep doing what you guys are doing! I’m a recent subscriber and look forward to all of your videos!
Wonderful overview and review! Love the videos, you strike a great balance of technical detail, personal commentary and photo demo! Keep up the solid work from Canada!
I was a professional wedding photographer for 20 years that used MXs and 35 50 65 200 lenses
I loved it because of the lightness and durability and simplicity.
You owned a 65mm lens? Impressive. Or did you mean 85mm?
Pentax was very aware of the ergonomic possibilities of camera design. In use, the controls fall easily to hand and the viewfinder information is available in such a way as to keep your attention on the focusing screen and the composition.
It was one of the prestige brands with presence at 6/7, 645 and 35mm. The spotmatic was a professional press camera as was the SV.
Their lenses and coatings were used by NASA. The MX is such a perfect walk around camera, I was never without mine. It fitted in the hand and could stay there all day. The ease of use meant you could operate it quickly and intuitively. The focussing screens are brilliant and very fine. The MX is rather like a Nikon FM but smaller. It had a professional system behind it. Pentax cameras are designed to be used out and about and are rugged; great for travel and wildlife. I have used it in the studio, in auditoriums. In the desert, up mountains.
There were several top photographers using Pentax, it was attainable and excellent. Canon and Nikon had a big worldwide support networks for professionals and that alone made them the main choices of professionals. Nikon were more sturdy than Canon and Canon were more cutting edge. Pentax’s and Nikon’s are easier to find in working condition than Canon.
As ever, a beautifully made video, for which many thanks. Pentax is often forgotten, so nice to give attention to this brand.
It would be interesting to see a comparison between all the great manual system cameras (LX, F1, New F1, Nikon F F2, F3, Minolta XK) you seem to have access to all of these and it would be interesting to compare them all in different circumstances. BTW love your videos - you give us really what film photography on youtube was lacking
You forgot to add Canon F1 to the line up.
@@kiwipics Isn't it (and the New F1) right after the LX in his reply? It is confusing that Nikon and Canon have the habit of giving their cameras similar names; I believe Canon is the main culprit.
The KX is my favorite of the three. Bigger body for easier handling/grip. Has more functions than the MX and less electronic failures of the LX. It's the best K series; even better than the K2.
What more functions does the KX have over the MX? I'm curious.
@@lexlayabout5757 mirror lock up
Congratulations for your very nice reviews and clear explanations ! I own an MX since 20 years still working fine. I found that if you tap the shutter button you will discover the mirror lock up function ! So MX also as it, but is a "hidden " function :D ! thank you for your nice work !
Diogo Vilhena Thanks for your kind comment and pointing out the hidden feature. I wasn’t aware of that.
@@AnalogInsights yeah you have to flick the shutter button lightly with your finger and it trips the mirror stage but not the shutter stage then you can use it as a MLU. It's obviously not something pentax intended but since the shutter and mirror are on different stages someone figured out that it can be done. I practiced without film in the camera and have gotten to where I can do it every time without wasting any frames. Thats the risk you take when you first start doing it, you might accidentally trip both stages and waste a shot.
@@Raevenswood The technique is known as 'the Pentax flick'.
This moment with the sky and orange light (ballooning too) ... is just AWESOME! :O
Another delightful video. Great to see Pentax 35mm featured - I've an old and battered K1000 and a number of Ricoh/Vivitar clones with the k mount - all reliable and a pleasure to use.
Amazing video! Very insightful!
The Pentax LX is a classic. One of my favorite cameras of all time.
I don't own one, but am impressed with the finder options.
the reason I do not purchase, is for reliability. There is a technician who repairs but the warranty I believe is less of a time period than other pentax cameras he repairs. I believe the electronics are more fragile than other models. Otherwise, I'd be all over this model.
Were it not for the PCB malfunctions popping up more and more on these, it would be my *most* favorite 35mm camera. In a perfect world it still is, but I don't trust mine - it's let me down plenty of times since the issue started (even after two repair attempts by Eric Hendrickson), whilst the KX and MX never have (except when I abused them and deserved to be let down).
Analog Insights Good to see some later Pentax cameras. They are, however, from different generations.
The first K-series included the K2, KX, and KM which is very much a bayonet version of the Spotmatic F; KX added more viewfinder information. The KX and KM were relatively short-lived, as the M-series - MX and ME - came out, they were phased out, leaving the K2 and its motorized version K2DMD as the top models. Soon enough both of these K-models were phased out as well, as the ME spawned other versions, which are of course quite well known. The LX was named for Pentax's 60th anniversary; Geoffrey Crawley pitted it against the Nikon F3 and Canon new F-1 and found it to be superior.
The K1000 was really a bit of an oddity as Pentax wanted to carry on building a Spotmatic-derivative, to be sold at a low price as a stop-gap, so it was a stripped-down KM, which developed it's enthusiastic following.
By the way, many of Pentax's "firsts" turned out to be seconds or thirds... but that said more about their advertising agency than Pentax themselves...
One of my favourites is the Pentax Kx. The best camera they made for film apart from medium format was the Pentax Mzs which I used on weddings. A fully specced prpfessional model.I have many Pentaxes and I enjoy them all.
Another great video. Nice to see fellow film photographers that love to shoot!
All these, _and_ the K2 DMD, were professional, if defined as being tough and having system accessories (incl MD, databack) and full info viewfinders. In Danilo Cecchi's book he calls the MX _The Little Professional_ and gives it a whole chapter. The short-lived KX _was_ going to get the accessories (a prototype MD was made) but it was overtaken by changing fashion. In 1970 most pros _didn't want any_ auto, but by the late 70's that had changed so the manual/auto K2 was upgraded to a pro spec as the K2DMD.
Pentax covered the small body craze with the MX, but pros did not really want small bodies. Pentax finally got it right with the LX, successor to the K2DMD and the best manual focus 35mm SLR ever IMHO, only the Nikon F3 got close. They never had great success in the pro market because they came too late, but that was the aim of these cameras.
I don't get the prestige thing because Pentax made the best film camera of all time : the 6x7 - and still make medium format cameras today. In the 1980s they were one of the big five, and today they are up there with Canonikon as the maker of a superb and bullet-proof full frame DSLR, of which it is a shame that most people have never heard of. They have a much smaller slice of the market now, but so do Hasselbald and Leica - and do they lack prestige?
I have had all of these Pentaxes except the KX :-)
Three of my all time film cameras, I had the KX at one time then bought the ME Super. But these 3 amigos especially the LX are my favorites.
Great, informative video, as always. I just spent 7 days in Colorado and decided to take my Pentax MX to document our trip. I mostly used my Pentax 35mm F2, with my second choice being my 50mm F1.4. Can't wait to get the photos back. This is an awesome camera, it sure why it doesn't have a bigger following.
I would like to see a review and pictures with the 1000MM SMC.
Nice video. I've been a longtime Olympus OM-1 user before switching to digital, but I did a time in high school where I was in charge among other things of the photo club and was therefore the dark room mentor. The club owned a Pentax MX, so I got to use it, and honestly the MX was the closest thing to my OM-1 I ever shot with (and this is a huge compliment). The only real difference was the mirror lockup feature, present on the Olympus and lacking on the MX. When I went digital, I found the Olympus offer lacking in the early 2K's, so I remembered the MX and went with a Pentax APS-C before Olympus got their act together and finally released the E-P1. Since 10 years I've switched to micro four thirds, so back to Olympus. I've tried and tested all the other big names, and the only other brand I'd consider shooting is Pentax. Real photographer's cameras.
Ordinosaurs & retro computers Do you find a mirror lock up feature of use on a 35mm camera? I see the point on something like a Pentax 67, but I don’t feel like I miss it on my MX.
@@mdjmurray : it's useful in macro with still subjects at a high reproduction ratio, and in bulb mode for light painting for instance. I agree it's not a showstopper though. But the OM-1 mirror kicks like a mule, and with the dampening material getting goey over time, if you want to be safe for critical shots, that's a plus.
The MX was bound to be close to the OM-1, the OM-1 inspired/forced Pentax to introduce the MX, realising the fashion was changing to smaller cameras. The whole Pentax K-series was suddenly dated (but the K1000 was salvaged). The MX had aperture in the viewfinder which OMs could never do back then because of the quirk of the lens aperture ring being out on the far end.
I still have an LX which I purchased in the 1980s.
However, my favourite vintage camera dates from the 1960s, and is the silky smooth Topcon RE Super.
I had one, beautiful but bulky. Sold it but kept the fantastic 58mm that I adapted with a K modified mount to fit the screws positions.
Always great, pro videos on pertinent topics. K1000 was the first 35mm camera I used in high school photo department. We’re indestructible and sharp! Thanks for your highly intelligent reviews and theory. But where is Jules? I miss his silent presence.
Thomas Jacobson Thanks so much for your kind comment. I really appreciate it! Jules was on a longer vacation when we shot the last videos but will be part of the next video(s) again. I miss his silent presence, too. :)
Something not a lot of people know is that the pentax MX does have a mirror lockup function, as it probably shares a lot of its mechanics with the KX, they just remove the button to activate it. It's still possible to lock up the mirror on the MX: you have to touch the shutter button like if it would be hot, giving it some taps till you give one strong enough to engage the mirror, but not enough to trigger the shutter! It sounds difficult but once you learn how to do it it's super easy! As I remember this trick works on the KX too, even if it has the button.
I bought my MX new in 1982 and for most of the time since it has been my favourite camera. Last year I acquired an Olympus OM1n and Om2n and can compare these with the MX and also a Nikon FE that I have had for about 8 years.
The MX is the smallest and has the edge in viewfinder information as it has an LED traffic light indicator for exposure. This beats the Olympus and Nikon cameras which only have match needles. In the dark you cannot see the reading! Nevertheless the OM and Nikon cameras have a very slight edge (imo) in build quality over the MX. Whilst the FE feels very smooth to operate, the best of the three marques, it has a flaw in that the meter is only on and the shutter can only be fired when the film advance lever is partially out, ie watch out with your eye. The MX meter is the best of the 3 in terms of operation as it switches on when you depress the shutter halfway and the shutter can be fired with the advance lever flush to the body. It also has the best viewfinder info for both shutter speed and aperture. On top of this the M series lenses are superbly built and compact. This contrasts with the Nikkor lenses which feel quite sloppy to operate and cannot match the Pentax dampened feel. The OM lenses are better than the Nikkors in this respect and feel very good to operate apart from the aperture ring which is not as decisive as the K or M series Pentax.
To summarise I would heartly recommend the Pentax MX to anyone wanting a quality 35mm mechanical film camera with access to a superb range of extremely well built lenses and that only uses a battery for the meter. I was however surprsied with the comment that the LX is very reliable and inexpensive. Please see reviews on UA-cam covering the major reliability problems of the LX which also normally costs about three or four times that of the MX or OM1.
Richard stevenson Thank you so much for your elaborative comment and comparative review. This is really interesting. To be honest, I wasn’t aware of the reliability issues regarding the Pentax LX, so thanks for pointing this out as well.
Its a pleasure Max. Comparing these cameras leads me to conclude that my ideal camera would have the superb feel and build quality of the OM1, the wind on mechanism of the FE and the interchangeable viewfinder/info, meter operation and lenses of the MX. I have not used an LX but from what I hear this specification of mine seems to sum up this camera. I think I have just persuaded myself to start the search for a good LX!
Just wanted to thank you for your extremely insightful and helpful comment. I just posted this question above before scrolling down the comments. Really appreciate this answer. Cheers
@@AnalogInsights The reliability issues come with age. After 20 years or so, some cameras start to have problems with the electronics. Mine is much older and works fine. The sticky mirror is also just from age; any camera should get a CLA anyway by then, and the replacement mirror bumpers are also better.
As always a very well produced and informative video..Thanks.
Thanks so much for your kind feedback. :)
I'm lucky enough to own a Pentax 28mm f3.5 SMC K (not the M version) which sits on my KX. 52mm filter thread. Sharp from edge to edge. It's a real beauty!
I have just re watched this video.I like it very much as I like all your videos. I have an MX and a KX and I enjoy using them. I have had the KX for longer than I can remember, it is a favourite camera, I like it's weight and quality plus the sensory side of woperating it. I have made amny beautiful ptographs with old Pentax cameras and lenses.
Trivia fun fact: About that SMC. Zeiss invented lens coatings in the 1930’s but partnered with Pentax to further develop multi coating and to develop the technology to integrate it into lens manufacture. Zeiss abruptly dropped Pentax and switched to partnering with Yashica. Was that because Pentax was not all that enthusiastic about multi-coating, or is it that Pentax saw the potential and wanted independence to gain a greater competitive advantage for their own lenses? We will never know the answer to that, but it needs to be noted that Pentax (before it was even using the Pentax name) was involved with Zeiss in early coating technology research and application to manufacturing techniques.
BTW, I still have my MX. It is on the shelf in front of me. I regard it as one of the greatest cameras ever made. Most people bought the ME Super, but the smart people bought the MX.
Is that a fact or a rumor. Most likely Pentax developed the 7 coating layer and Zeiss bought a license until the patent ran out. www.aohc.it/testi.php?id_testi=59
Michael Russo The relationship between Zeiss and Pentax was a lot deeper than a lot of people realise with each company being a lead partner for different aspects of development. Zeiss had invented lens coatings in the first place but the Japanese companies, for whatever reason, had greater resources in terms of both research money and engineering talent and so both company’s brought a lot to the table. Pentax was on the ascendant at the time and had a “let’s shoot for the moon” attitude, while Zeiss’s camera brands were struggling and they had a more “protective” and “go cautiously” attitude. Zeiss, for example, had absorbed Voigtländer in the 1954-64 time period and Voigtländer’s last glory was introducing the world’s first zoom lens for stills photography in 1959 in partnership with the Zoomar company. But Zeiss let that partnership wither away instead of going all-in on what would prove to be the future of photography.
The reason that Pentax abandoned the Spotmatic line and went all-in with the new K-mount is complex. There was a need to go to bayonet-mount anyway, because customers favored it, but it also appears to have been a Zeiss partnership idea with both company’s intending at the time of development to introduce a common mount as basis for a new Pentax/Zeiss camera ecosystem. It seems that it was Zeiss that got cold feet when it realised how big the investment was going to be, however Zeiss was an active participant in the K mount project for at least two years. This is demonstrated by the SMC Pentax 28mm f2 (the early variant often nicknamed the “Hollywood”) which was designed during 1973 and 1974 by Erhard Glatzel at Zeiss and released independently by Zeiss as the Distagon 28mm f2 T*.
Another evidence of the Zeiss connection showed up after the partnership had ended, so I don’t know if it was an older design from their Zeiss days that took them a long time to bring into production, or was just a matter of respect for their history with Zeiss, was one of their best ever lenses, the SMC Pentax-M* 300mm f4 released in 1981. The star on the letter M is easy to miss, but it is a very Zeiss thing, and it appeared on no other Pentax-M lens.
The history page you linked to is very interesting, although told from a Pentax perspective with a strong emphasis on the SMC. It ignores the fact that multi-layer technology was already in widespread use prior to 1971, starting with 2 layer coatings in 1943 developed by Zeiss, and that Minolta had a head start over Pentax with a 5 layer process that was being mimicked by Nikon by 1970. And there was no mention of Canon’s independent SSC process. The article also seems to not acknowledge the co-operation between Zeiss and Asahi which had existed since the 1950’s and gave Asahi access to Zeiss research. This does not diminish Asahi’s accomplishment in being able to patent a process for 7 layer coating in 1971. This quickly fed back to Zeiss, who introduced T* coatings in 1972. As I suggest in my first comment, I think that the breakdown of the Zeiss/Pentax partnership is probably as much to do with the Pentax desire for competitive advantage as it was a case of Zeiss caution. Unfortunately, the truth about what was said in corporate meetings at both company’s is unknowable, but it is fascinating to speculate based on what we do know about what products came to market.
@@artistjoh I doubt it. Pentax just made good stuff and people can't believe their over priced status symbol Zeiss shit can't keep up.
Michael Russo Zeiss may well be over priced, but through the first 7 decades of the 20th century they were at the cutting edge of camera design. The distagon, planar, and sonnar designs which those great Pentax lenses were based on were all invented by Zeiss. Lens coatings were a Zeiss invention. Hasselblad lenses were Zeiss lenses with Hassy branding. People usually don’t realise that Schott glass, which is the World’s leading developer of photographic glass was started by Zeiss and is within the Zeiss umbrella. To acknowledge the great things achieved by Nikon, Canon, Leica, Pentax, Panasonic/Olympus, Minolta/Sony, Mamiya, Rollei, is very reasonable because they have all done very great things.
But to state that Zeiss is simply a status symbol betrays an amazing lack of knowledge about camera history or the role that Zeiss has played, and continues to play in partnering with other manufacturers. The Zeiss/Asahi partnership was very productive for both company’s. The name Pentax was a Zeiss brand which Asahi purchased from Zeiss in the 1950’s (early Asahi cameras were called Asahiflex before the purchase of the Pentax name.) and of course, the best thing Pentax ever did - develop the K mount was hatched as a partnership project with Zeiss, which Zeiss ultimately, and very stupidly, backed out of leaving Asahi to launch it on their own. In the 1960’s and 1970’s Zeiss was their own worst enemy, and Pentax was the scrappy newcomer taking over the cutting edge, or at least mixing it with Canon.
Of course it could be argued that Pentax is now repeating history in that, like Zeiss they have been ravaged by competitors, mostly Canon and Nikon in their case, and they are no longer the major force they once were. Hopefully, like Zeiss, they can let their non-photographic businesses carry them through, so they can survive long term as a niche player. They have been hugely important historically, and I would love to see them rise again.
@@artistjoh The bi plane filled the sky's at one time too.
Great video, guys! And the subject was a treat for me. Pentax, together with Nikon, one of my favorites brands of photo gear. In the last year the MX was the camera that I used the most. I also enjoy the ME Super, but miss the DOF preview... Oh, love the Afga APX too. Cheers
I have Pentax and Nikon. One nice thing is that their aperture and focusing rings turn the same way, so I can switch with no problem. And I have Bronica, which has the same directions as well (and bayonets on and off the same direction as Nikon). Just a happy coincidence, as I did not use it as a criterion, but it actually is very important, as I never turn something the wrong way by mistake.
Great cameras bought lx years ago never let me down great meter had some great shots from it dont use it so much now with digital cameras lx was on par with my digital camera with ease if not better sometimes shame you don't hear about pentax as much now never sell it and all the lenses solid as a rock
I own the Pentax MX-1. Very compact . The MX-1 is aperture priority which makes it great for street photography w SMC Pentax-M 5omm f/2 Lens. I also bought 2 additional metal adapters to use Yashica/Contax lenses and M42 mount lenses.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the MX-1 a digital camera?
When the MX and LX were current models, I liked using the Agfa CT18 and CT21 35mm colour transparency films a lot.
Great video. I find the older M42 mount Asahi Pentax cameras more solidly built, more affordable, and the Takumar lenses are some of the best lenses mechanically and optically, including Leica/Contax/Nikon. May be a future video ??
A video about the screw mount Pentax cameras and lenses will follow. We have tonns of stuff to talk about.
Best regards, Greg
I luckily picked up a Tamron 135mm F2.8 with a Pentax M42 adapter on it for $6. I've noticed when I used the M42 lenses on my Pentax MX, the aperture setting is off by one stop in the preview window. Do you have the same issue? Not that big of a deal, if you're aware of it.
The 60's in photography are sometimes called 'the golden era of Pentax'. During this decade Asahi Optical was THE most prestigious Japanese manufacturer and bigger than Canon and Nikon combined. Some SMC Takumar lenses were rebranded by elite camera manufacturer from Switzerland - Alpa. Zeiss Oberkochen, after their failure to compete on 35mm SLR market, sought a partner in Japan for joint efforts, and contacted Asahi. This cooperation didn't last long - in the end, Zeiss made the deal with Yashica - but gave birth to the K-mount itself and some exquisite lenses like 15mm/3.5 with aspherical element (very hard to manufacture back then) and 28mm/2.0 (also known as 'Hollywood').
The aperture settings on M42 camera/lens combinations varies due to modern battery voltage difference, and/or due to different generation/type of M42 cameras or lenses. Best bet is use a light meter, (or "light meter app" in a smartphone), till you establish a satisfactory baseline for each camera/lens that you have. Good luck.
Thanks for your video. It would be nice to point out that all K-mount manual lens of Pentax (and M42 lenses, like the Takumars, with a simple adapter) will work great on a Pentax DSLR. Thus, a "win-win" situation if one wants to shoot both film and digital. My SMC K 50/1.2 lens is excellent on the K-1 ... and it's damn good on film, too. Cheers, J
I really enjoyed Greg introducing his Pentax MX! The usual good review, tasteful video, nicely edited. I like Pentax and especially the MX and LX, I have two of each "Just in case". I can say after repairing some lenses that Pentax didn't shy away from plastics and adhesives in the "A" series lenses, the quality of those is nothing to write home about.
It is true... but up to a certain point. While the SMC Pentax lenses (and to a lesser degree the Pentax-M ones) have a great build, the top-of-the-line Pentax-A objectives are also very well made. It's just the cheaper ones that are questionable. One example: the 2/50mm has a weak plastic diaphragm ring, while the 1.4/50mm is more or less comparable to the M version. Considering everything, the best A and A Star lenses are still a great choice for digital Pentax shooters who like to use manual lenses. The electric contacts allow to use any exposure mode and also use P-TTL flashes
@@PaoloServadei That is good to know, I have often thought of the f/1.4, perhaps I will take the plunge!
you guys are the best. so refreshing to watch
Nice video. Was bought a Pentax MX in 1978 by my mother. Still have it - a few battle scars though!
Just bought an MX, totally blame you guys ;) Also hope we'll see Jules back soon, you guys always produce such interesting images together.
Rory Prior Haha. Glad to hear that. I hope you enjoy the MX. Jules will be part of the next video again. :)
When it comes to film cameras , what is all too often overlooked is the fact that Pentax was rated far ahead of Canon . Most photographers wanting to upgrade to a pro 35 shortlisted Nikon , Pentax and Olympus , pretty much in that order . I those days , the Canon 35mm rangefinders were very popular as they represented good value for money for general amateur photography . Nobody I knew in the late sixties to the late eighties indicated any kind of burning desire to buy a Canon. They were pretty much in the second tier of the SLR market together with Minolta , Miranda , Yashica and Mamiya . The press photographers used Leica rangefinders almost exclusively due to their legendary ruggedness and reliability , although in the mid to late seventies , Olympus became popular due to the lower bulkiness and weight of the Olympus system . Canon made its mark in the digital era and it was certainly better with digital than was Pentax. So the younger digital natives when looking at film cameras , went for Canon. The inverse was true of myself ; when I migrated to digital in 2010 , Pentax was far behind so naturally I opted for Nikon based on film camera reliability and performance . Canon was not even considered by me as I rated Canon on the film camera experience . I am now looking at getting a Pentax K70 in place of my Nikon D3000. I prefer shooting film and my C330 , Yashica D and 1967 Pentax Spotmatic is in regular use . I also use a Pentax MZ 5 - N fairly often.
As humans , we make decisions based on what we grew up with so the general feeling that the film Canon was better than the Pentax is simply not the case . With digital , Canon made its well deserved reputation .
Great video. Just started shooting with a Pentax MX that was given to me a while back. I have tonnes of other cameras from Zenit E to om2n, from Holga to Hasselblad 500c/m and Rolleiflex 2.8e.
I owned an LX, beautiful piece of kit
very beautiful video. some of the photos brought a tear o two. thank you
would you upload a well made video detailing the shutter sounds of the three cameras? something like this: /watch?v=rHE0_jmB-F0 , it is the best example.
also please do tell the name of the song that starts at about 6:50 and continues until about 8:44
Still got my MX bought it new in 1976 £150 still got and occasionally used 👌😎☕️
Not sure about the "prestige" associated with Canon or Nikon compared to Pentax. The misconception brought in by DSLR marketing.
Canon was always cheap sneaking in plastic wherever they can and their fd lenses were a disgrace compared to Pentax lenses. Also, Canon and Nikon were basically making "Leica" clones, before Asahi Pentax actually invented the modern SLR. So, Pentax is definitely more prestigious in that regard.
Pentax cameras were quite iconic, the Beatles owned them, while Canon/Nikons were run of the mill photo journalist cameras.
Back in 1990, I had an opportunity to buy practically brand new Pentax LX for only 600.00 Canadian Dollars. That was a lot of money for me back then but I knew that brand new Pentax LX was around $ 1200.00. I don't think that anybody ever used that camera, it was wrapped in original plastic, it had a smell of brand new camera and not a scratch on it.
It seems like most people in North America had some kind of Pentax basic gear back in 1980's and 1990's but nobody knew about Pentax LX.
I still regret not buying that camera. One of the best film SLR ever made!
Pentax K1000, Silver body MX & Black LX (late edition) + SMC focal lengths. : )
The KX also came in a motor drive version; I currently own one I bought back in '75. Took me over 30 years to source a drive for it though. It used a rather impractical vertical pistol grip battery with a huge ni-cad battery.
A little surprising that some large fundamental differences with the LX were not mentioned - it is the only of the three to offer aperture-priority AE, and has a 1/2000-capable shutter. It also has a novel meter-off-the-film tech that allows for accurate automatic long exposures.
Also has interchangeable viewfinders.
Excellent video and review. When I first saw Greg, I thought you finally took off for Hollywood, soon to appear in the gossip tabloids arm in arm with Taylor Swift.Bet she'd melt in your arms.Anyway great photos, great cameras,heading out to the New England woods to photograph leaf filtered sunlight as it strikes glistening rills, granite outcroppings, bright mossy boulders etc. All the best to you.
Ahaha, thanks so much for your comment, Steve. This made my day. Let's just say Taylor Swift is not my type. I'm more into blue-eyed brunettes. ;)
Hope you had a wonderful day taking photographs in the New England woods. This sounds amazing!
All the best to you, too!
Analog Insights Thanks! 😊
Thanks for the video, but what if I asked you to choose two or three pentax cameras for me, combining mechanical and electrical features with many specifications?
great video, I love analog, Pentax and Germany... Cheers Andy ...
Grea review. All three camera's r amazing but u forgot about the Legendary The Asahi Pentax K1000.
The K1000 is ok, but the KX takes the cake.
Love this and all your programs!!!!
My Pentax road map was K1000, ME Super, SuperA. Pentax got rather left behind when autofocus arrived which is when I changed to Canon EOS. Still lust after an LX but they are quite pricy. Still have my ME Super.
Love pentax equipments..Asahi takumar wow awesome..
Hello Sir
May you Choose two or three for me, which have most of the advantages and diversity، and It combines electronic and mechanical cameras.
Thanks
Nice review. I like the old Pentax cameras with m42 mount, because I have a great collection of m42 lenses from fish-eye to tele. The are great cameras. But I'm collecting m42 and m39 cameras from all brands. Amazing stuf.
Excellent video, thank you!
Great video! I love Asahi Pentax cameras
Enjoyed the video. Based on your personal experience, what are your recommendations for a K mount lens 28-50mm range with the most micro contrast?
wow i was looking for this thank you very much
You're welcome. Glad to hear that! :)
I had the MX, and would of loved to had the LX. I was only a lowly studio assistant at that time, and sadly couldn't afford the LX. I did however love my MX, which was still small even with a drive attached.
Great video ,thank you for this,i have some pentax camera and i think that price/quality is very good for this.
Nice camera's and beautiful lenses.
I think Pentax has it's own prestige but that didn't extend past the 1990's so by todays standards they have become somewhat obscure as a company, although they still have a diehard user base. Personally I still have my fathers stainless steel MX that he gave me in 1996 and it still works I also shoot with a Pentax 6x7 MLU, and I recon I'll be buying an LX in the near future. I also had a couple of ME Supers over the years. I liked those for the ergonomics and small form factor but they definitely weren't as robust as the MX or LX and they cost more to fix than they are worth on the used market. As far as Pentax in the digital market I'm not really a fan but many of their film cameras are fantastic. I'm fine if people want a "prestigious" brand because that keeps the prices low on these awesome vintage pentax bodies and lenses.
I love your reviews and channel. Just came across them researching getting into film and I have learnt so much. Do you think for someone shooting with modern Fuji systems but who wants to get into film for certain situations/fun/hobby etc should go for the Olympus Om-1/2 or the Pentax MX? Thanks and support from London.
Thanks so much for your comment and kind words. Please excuse my late response. Well, this is a tough choice. In my opinion, you cannot go wrong with either of them. Both systems come with great lenses and especially the two cameras you mentioned are really small and versatile. So it's really about details such as the light meter, battery availability, etc.
Personally, I would opt for an Olympus OM-1 but that is really a matter of personal preference.
@@AnalogInsights No worries my friend, really appreciate your response and advice. Thank you very much for your great work and reply. Have a lovely day
It's interesting that Pentax used the very same same style for the X as Minolta used on their X-** cameras and as Fuji now uses for their X-Series cameras.
Informative and tantalizing! What are the largest print sizes one could realistically expect that have a quality look and feel?
Is it possible to use the film camera?
I mean 35mm fill available?
Then how do you develop them ?
MX actually has a mirror lock-up. You wind and hit shutter button rapidly with your finger but not hard enough to trigger the shutter - try it.
Very nice video. The background info on Pentax history have been quite unprecise though. It's been the market leader of cameras at that time and none of these 3 cameras anything else than professional tools. Quite a bit more affordable than the "expensive" players Canon and Nikon though
Great stuff. Pentax have the best haptics in the business.
great video again.. I have MX but use ME Super more because of Aperture priority... BTW MX has horizontal "cloth" shutter which is really silent in comparison with metal one.. anyway good job!
Don't forget the k mount to m42 adapter for yet more lens options
I bought a K1000 and a LX in 1984 and both are in mint condition. I've since bought the K10 so I could use my old lenses. I wish film was still a used medium and old Pentax cameras where worth more...I'll wait.
You can still buy film, it is making a comeback. Tends to be expensive as not a mass market any more. Good, old, film cameras are worth a lot these days.
Wonderful! I recently acquired an MX, but it's not working as well as I'd hoped. On occasion, when I take a shot, the mirror latch stays held open, and the mirror doesn't drop back down.
I've changed the seals and damper (so it's not the mirror sticking to the damper foam - shame, that would have been a nice easy fix), and have lubricated the mechanism in the lower body, however the problem still persists. Do you know if these cameras were prone to the same issue the ME Super has in which the rubber dampers in the body degrade and become sticky?
My MX was stood for about 15 years unused by its previous owner, however she has looked after it meticulously so I'm certain that the issue isn't from misuse or accidental damage (it looks pristine!).
The few shots Iw as able to take have come out beautifully exposed and pin sharp on the f1.8 50mm lens, so I'm pretty keen to get it working properly. It's such a pleasant machine to shoot with.
The weight, feel and balance are wonderful and the controls all fall perfectly to hand.
When it's all sorted, I suspect it's going to get a lot of use.
The Hat , I had this sticky mirror problem with the LX and sent it to special Pentax service in Lübeck/Germany. I never observed this problem in another 35mm Pentax camera.
Maybe this service is able to help you - they are very kind.
Best regards, Greg
Ian Thomas hi Greg, that does fit with what my research has turned up. It seems as though there are a lot of rubber parts on the mechanism which are prone to degrading and becoming sticky.
In cameras which have been used extensively, it doesn’t cause an issue but if they’re stood unused for a long while, they exhibit this same symptom.
My ME Super has done exactly the same thing and it’s going in for a rebuild this month, and the MX is in for repair once that one is done.
I managed to get a roll through the MX which had about half the frames blank, but the shots which did come out we’re really quite superb.
The 50mm prime that came with it is fantastic.
I have an ME. Got it around 1980. Always kinda lusted after the MX.
They continue to go up in price. Get one while you can.
Awesome ! What’s your favourite Pentax 35mm film camera?
Hello! Amazing video!! I want and advice, between a pentax KM and a pentax MX which one you recommended me to buy. It will be my first analog camera. Thank you
The MX was superior although smaller (which some people don't like). The KM was a budget camera, rather basic.
@@dukenukem5768 Sorry, but this is not correct. The larger models were made by higher quality materials. Anyhow, I would neither recommend the MX nor the K2, but the fully mechanical KX or KM. All the electronic Pentax cameras will fail sooner or later and there will be NO chance for repair - just expensive paper weight.
@@ytuberization I am with you on the KX. By the way, the MX worked fully mechanically and only the meter required batteries, like the KM/K1000.
However there are three different generations of cameras here. The MX was in the generation _after_ the K2 & KX, and although the KM was launched at the same time as the K2 & KX (and later re-launched as the cut-down K1000), its technology mostly belonged to the _previous_ generation, being a Spotmatic with a K-mount grafted on. The KM/K1000 had hardly any viewfinder information and had a slow CdS meter with a limited range, and was an outdated design the day it was launched (let alone 21 years later); but the sort of people who bought it didn't know or care.
The KM/K1000 was designed for cheapness (without compromising solidity) for the budget market, while the MX with its full info viewfinder and its range of databacks etc was aimed at advanced amateurs and cetain types of pro. It's a matter of preference which you prefer - like some people like driving VW Beetles and wearing sackcloth, and others don't.
Pentax MG (actually just a rebranded ME) was my first SLR, wich I got as a kid. That was a neat little camera, but it tended to underexpose a bit and without possibility to set the camera manually (what was fixed on ME super) and soon started to frustrate me quite a lot. And the fact that the only 3rd party lens that I had started to fail I wanted to upgrade, so I lusted over Pentax Program A, Super A or the LX. But since good Pentax cameras was hard to get in my country back then eventually I needed to switch for another brand...
Gruß
can you please let me know the tilt and shift lens set up??? i thank you ahead😊
I've got all of them, accompanied by a KM and two MEs. Excellent reliable and robust cameras, but unfortunately no one is able to repair the LX anymore. The light meter is way off and the automatic does quite strange things...