View Full Version : Should I Buy an Old Minolta or Old Pentax Kit?
wgerrard
12-25-2007, 14:48
I'm thinking hard about selling a couple of little-used toys and dabbling in the manual focus SLR world. Here are my requirements, as posted on a Minolta forum:
1. Little automation beyond a meter in the camera, preferably match needle. I'd use AE, but it's not essential.
2. Nothing that uses batteries I can't buy today.
3. A viewfinder that gets along with my eyeglasses. (I don't use diopters because I don't take my glasses off.) Re: number one above, I sometimes have trouble seeing LEDs and diodes in a viewfinder, depending on their location.
4. A model that stands a good chance of not immediately needing service, and, conversely, a model for which CLA's, parts and repairs are still available.
Lens-wise, I'm looking for recommendations for something in the 28/35 range, a 50, and 80/105 or so. I don't use a flash and like to shoot around sunset.
Minoltas and Rokkors are appealing, because of price, if nothing else. Perusing Karen N.'s site, she's got me looking at Spotmatic SP II's. Both brands look to be a place where a dollar goes pretty far.
However, I wonder about the wisdom of acquiring hardware from the 1970's. Maybe something like a new Nikon FM10 is a safer bet. Anything else out there in the market?
What say you all?
I would second the Pentax. If you truly want a basic model, try and find a barely used K1000. They aren't hard to find at all, and very inexpensive.
Olympus OM[124] with 28/2, 50/1.4, 85/2 or 28/2.8, 50/1.4 and 100/2.8,
depending on your budget.
If you like the Hexar AF and Leicas you will like the OMs.
Cheers,
Roland.
I'd go with a Minolta XE-7 or XD-11. The Rokkor glass for these Minoltas is second to none (Japanese glass)
I say Pentax. I have a Spotmatic with a locked up mirror from being in a closet for many years. I hope to get it fixed soon.
Olympus OM[124] with 28/2, 50/1.4, 85/2 or 28/2.8, 50/1.4 and 100/2.8,
depending on your budget.
If you like the Hexar AF and Leicas you will like the OMs.
Cheers,
Roland.
The Oly over a Minolta anyday. But the Pentaxes are sweet.
Joe Brugger
12-25-2007, 15:29
Though I worked with screw-mount Pentaxes for a long time, to me the Minolta glass always seemed to give a smoother and sharper rendition. You can't go wrong with either, assuming they're in good shape, but I'd lean toward the Minolta lenses.
wgerrard
12-25-2007, 15:29
I'd go with a Minolta XE-7 or XD-11. The Rokkor glass for these Minoltas is second to none (Japanese glass)
I'm really tempted. The deciding factor will likely be service. Is anyone still working on these? Parts? I've seen people recommend the X-700 because so many are around for parts. Can I get an XE-7 or XD-11 fixed?
The last film SLR I owned was a K1000 that my parents bought for me umpteen years ago. I'd like that kind of simplicity again, and really do prefer match needle to LED readouts.
I'm a Pentax user from the start and know very little about Minolta's gear.
I can highly recommend K and M series cameras, at least the ones with full manual capability. The LX, MX, and KX models are the most sought out, the LX still being very expensive.
All are really well made, at a minimum comparable to the best Voigtlander models for build quality.
Lenses are excellent also, with only a few examples being "dogs". The 85/2 M series coming to mind.
Prices for Pentax lenses seem to be being propped up because they are directly compatible with new Pentax dslr's. So if you think you might like one of those as well, the system is an easy choice.
If not, Olympus, Canon FD, and maybe Minolta systems might make more sense since they are truly dead systems and prices for even the more desirable lenses are pretty low.
Outside of a Bessa L and 15mm lens and abortive attempts to use FED, I have yet to buy a 35mm rangefinder. The Pentax system offers nearly enough the same functionality and it is paid for... My actual RF gear is medium format.
So try it, you might like it!
oftheherd
12-25-2007, 15:32
In the early to mid-70s, both Minolta and Pentax were considered pro cameras. I don't know enough about Minota to recommend for or against. I have used Pentax and they were/are good cameras when found in good shape. There lenses are well known to be sharp. So would be a Fujica ST 801 but the LEDs might be a problem. Also, lenses are harder to get. I wouldn't be afraid to recommend an Olympus OM1. I think they are a little more expensive than the Minoltas, maybe not the Pentax as they, especially their lenses, tend to be sought after. The OM lenses are well known for sharpness as well.
Good luck.
Leighgion
12-25-2007, 15:37
Nothing wrong with buying old photo kit so long as, as observed, you can still get them worked on.
This is one of the big benefits of buying old Nikons and Canons. There were so many of them sold and their brand reputation established that it's much easier to find people to work on them. Just some quick googling found me a one-man Nikon shop who has done work for me at a very reasonable price on my FE and FE2. Both cameras were in good shape, but needed a bit of touch up I wasn't going to attempt myself.
Between the choice of Minolta and Pentax, I'd be kind of inclined towards Pentax because my sense is that it would be easier to get work done on them vs Minoltas, but it's not a hypothesis I've put to the test.
If you're willing to consider Spotmatics and FM10s, I'd put old Nikons into consideration too. While you will pay more for the bodies and glass, the FE and FE2 would fit your requirements.
I'm really tempted. The deciding factor will likely be service. Is anyone still working on these? Parts? I've seen people recommend the X-700 because so many are around for parts. Can I get an XE-7 or XD-11 fixed?
http://www22.brinkster.com/garryscamera/
He's fixed both my XE-7 and XD-11
The last film SLR I owned was a K1000 that my parents bought for me umpteen years ago. I'd like that kind of simplicity again, and really do prefer match needle to LED readouts.
The XE-7 uses the needle while the XD-11 is LED.
wgerrard
12-25-2007, 15:43
Thanks, Colyn. Good info to know.
If it is a one camera-one lens issue, then options are quite a few. If the wish is to build up to a full system one day, I would go with Nikon or Pentax since the lenses are useful with the digital SLR systems.
I got an MX with the 40mm/2.8 pancake lens recently. It would be a reliable and compact system.
I would recommend a Pentax SLR with the 50mm/1.4 SMC lens. It is a very sharp lens and it is fast.
Maybe an ME Super would be a good choice.
ChrisPlatt
12-25-2007, 15:47
Another reason to choose Pentax is Eric Hendrickson.
pentaxrepairs@aol.com
Chris
I would say Pentax for sure but unlike the first response I would recommend that you consider the Spotmatic series. Maybe a late F model with the hot shoe. They usually still work well without servicing. Assuming you can focus OK with the screen, (you may wish to test this first) the Spotmatic has the great advantage that the body and lenses are dirt cheap on eBay and very plentiful hence with huge choice as to quality and price. Best of all they are first rate in quality both being built like brick outhouses and the lenses having very good optical quality. I have recently acquired a 4/3 series digital SLR and have been using Takumar lenses with an adapter, with great satisfaction. If you wish to go beyond Takumar lenses there are even more M42 screw mount lenses available and many of these have superb optics as well. However if the Spotmatic does not suit and you are worried about focusing, the one suggestion I would make is to hunt around till you find a camera with split image focussing which has an effect very like the Leica rangefinder focussing and is positive to use. I cannot recall which bodies have this although I think some Nikon interchangeable screens do. This helps tremendously I find, as my eyes are quite poor too although I use a Spotmatic and can get by. If you adopt the Spotmatic suggestion the following lenses are first class.
- 28mm f3.5 (acknowledged as being sharp and contrasty.
- 50mm f1.8 or 50mm f1.4 (The former is dirt cheap and very plentiful. It is regarded as extremely sharp. The latter is also pretty well available but goes for more money. It too is extremely well regarded for its sharpness and bokeh.) There is also a 50mm f4 macro which is very good and quite cheap. It works well as a standard lens if the slowness does not bother you.
-105mm f2.8 (there is an 85mm f1.8 but it is a bit rare and pricey compared to all the others.) The 105 is extremely sharp and contrasty from my experience.
-135mm f3.5 This like most 135s of the era is good. The bigger faster 135mm f 2.5 is nice too. The later SMC version of that lens is said to be sharper.
-200mm f4. This lens wows me. I have seen MTF curves in an old magazine and it performs right up there with the best.
If you do choose Pentax but go down the later bayonet mount route, do some research on the internet as regards lenses as Pentax went through a purple patch there in its early K mount period where some of its lenses were regarded as having lower "consumer grade" quality and of not being of the same high standard as the screw mount ones.
I should add that recently I have been buying a few Canon FL mount lenses too and have found these to be of exceptional quality. A suitable body in good condition is cheap.
My wife and I did our first trip to Europe in '78 with a Pentax K1000 and pancake 40 and another K1000 with the wonderful 85/1.8. My daugheter still has that kit and I think it was perfect for that trip. We just kept switching cameras. I would, however, recommend instead the Nikon FM with the focal lengths of your choice. The 35/2 is excellent and the 85/1.8 that I have is a wonderful lens, but check the Nikon Compendium and get the right one, as some of them weren't so good. I've seen FMs for some very nice prices with the meter still working. I don't know if it uses a currently available battery. Lastly, the eyeglass problem is solved readily by the F3HP.
Pentax for the win. I shoot with both a Pentax Spotmatic F and a K10d. Love them both and they both are tanks.
Joe Brugger
12-25-2007, 16:09
Honeywell in Denver, for something like $30, used to install a to split-image focusing screen in Spotmatic bodies. Both of my Spot F's were done that way, and it was a big help, but I don't think the split-image screen was very common.
PeterM didn't mention the 85/1.8 SMCT which is an absolutely phenomenal lens -- unfortunately good copies go for $300 and up.
The Spot F does have a bridge rectifier circuit that controls battery output voltage, so you can use silver oxide cells in place of the original PX625 mercury cell.
The Nikon FM someone mentioned uses 2 MS76 silver oxide cells that are easy to get. I think you can also use a 3v lithium battery as well.
Go for the Minolta or something else; anything but Pentax. The last thing I need is more people competing for the lenses I want to buy. :)
shadowfox
12-25-2007, 16:30
Roland said it.
Sold my black Pentax MX, still got the OM-1 :D
Another suggestion is the camera I got to replace the Pentax MX, see this thread (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51880)
PeterM didn't mention the 85/1.8 SMCT which is an absolutely phenomenal lens -- unfortunately good copies go for $300 and up.
Yes I have amended my response to include mention of this one. I have this lens and can attest to its quality. You do not often often see them for sale but when they do come up, as Joe Brugger says, it is not unusual to see them going for over $300 and up to $400 or thereabouts on eBay. Probably a higher price than the Nikon 85mm f 1.8 of the era which is also regarded as being a beauty. I can say it is a nice lens of comparable build quality to the other Taks. It is sharp and has lovely bokeh when shot wide open.
I can rave about these (Takumar) lenses till the cows come home for milking. For many years they have been sleepers. With the exception perhaps of the 85mm they were so common that no one wanted them. I am a bit like ChrisN - part of me would prefer they stay unknown, but I am lucky. I have pretty well all of the Takumar lenses I could ever want and am turning my attention to Nikon and Canon of the era.
I would recommend nikkormat FT2 and non-AI lenses, like 28/F2.0, 50/F2.0, and 85/F2.0 or 105/F2.5. They are cheap, very good quality and easy to find.
I don't think you can wrong w/ either Pentax or Minolta. If I were in your shoes, I would base my choice on price and the particular focal length(s) I wanted for the SLR kit. Minolta and Pentax both made brilliant 50mm lenses, but you may find one manufacturer stronger in other focal lengths of interest to you.
Hard to beat those spotmatics from the late 60s/early 70s -- simplicity and ruggedness. That said, I've been very happy w/ my X700, and would recommend it to anyone.
I used to use Pentax lenses, stopped using them for about ten years,and then I realized what I was missing.
I have the 85mm/1.8 SMC and I use it often. I have even used it on a Pen FT and Canon T90. The beauty of Pentax screw mount lenses is the ability to use themon almost any SLR manual focus system.
I recently bought a Pentax 28mm/3.5 for $6 from KEH. It looks like new. This is other nice thing about older Pentax lenses; you sometimes get great bargains.
I paid $100 recently ot get my Spotmatic F an overhaul. It is one of few SLR cameras that I donot hesitate spending money on. It has class.
My primary camera is (still) a Pentax K1000. It's old enough to vote! (Actually it's now old enough to drink.)
I traded up from the Spotmatic in the 1980s, with the primary reason that it's incredibly clumsy to change lenses on the Spotmatic.
If you look at the K1000, there are apparently three versions of it. I have the first one, the Japanese one, and apparently the newer ones are made elsewhere. You can google this information on the net which tells you what to look for.
The K1000 has been incredibly reliable for over 20 years now!
Another vote for Pentax. The SMC lenses are superb. KX, MX and the LX being my favorite bodies.
cosmonot
12-25-2007, 18:06
I think the only film SLRs that we're going to keep are the OM-1 and a pair of Pentax LX. I find either a joy to use, and glass is cheap compared to rangefinders in general. I just got a handful of adapters so glass from the spotmatic, LX, and OMs will get put to use on whatever digital EOS we have as well.
So yeah, one of the better Pentax bodies or an OM would be my pick for an analog SLR outfit. Though the spotmatics are built like tanks, they are kind of big. I'd vote for a later K mount body.
Surveying the responses...
It seems a significant factor is about the validity of the mechanical cameras, as in reliabilty, battery availability and repairability. While both Pentax and Minolta made mechanical cameras (Spotmatic and K-mount equivalences, and the SR/SRT series respectively), I can see a main issue being battery availability. Later Pentax models use batteries which are still widely - and cheaply available but the SRT models still insists on using the mercury 625. Of course it is possible to improvise or recalibrate the SRT but it would be extra expense, but then, you need to make allowance for the camera to be given a once-over by a technician so that adjustment can be part of the overhaul anyway. Apart from that which might reduce the difference between the marques, Minolta lenses are of great quality and the prices remain low: the value of Pentax K-mount lenses are on the increase these days and the low prices they went for only a few years ago are less likely to be seen again.
This being said: if you do not mind later electronic cameras, the X-series Minoltas such as X-700 and X370 and its variants are viable cameras and cheap as chips, plentyful, and likely to remain so. The latter takes all Minolta manual-focus lenses and as long as they are meter-coupled then it functions correctly, and if it goes wrong it would be very inexpensive to get another one... or three.
wgerrard,
I've bought from this person and also had an OM-1 and a Minolta SRT-201 serviced, with excellent results. He does very thorough CLA's on what he sells. I can recommend him highly if you want to buy serviced equipment.
http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZtitteringtonQQhtZ-1
I'd vote for the Pentax ME. A sweet fitting camera that feels good and shoot well. With a 50mm smc it will give you satisfaction and good pictures.
wlewisiii
12-25-2007, 18:43
Of those two, Pentax without a doubt. That said, have you considered Canon FD mount cameras? Also quite inexpensive and giving extremely high "bang for buck". Plus no DSLR users running up the price on desirable lenses. A T90 with 28/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.4 & 100/2.8 is a wonderful kit. The F1 or A1 would be excellent choices as well...
Manual focus SLRs are an embarrassment of cheap riches these days. :D No matter which you choose you'll do well.
William
wgerrard
12-25-2007, 18:51
I'm impressed by the detail and thoughtfulness of these responses. Much appreciated.
Does anyone know anything about this bay seller:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Minolta-XD-11-XD11-f1-4-Camera-WITH-30-DAY-GUARANTEE_W0QQitemZ370008580903QQihZ024QQcategoryZ 43486QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
She's offering a 30-day return, and says the camera has been cleaned, new light seals and a new mirror bumper installed.
Go for the Minolta or something else; anything but Pentax. The last thing I need is more people competing for the lenses I want to buy. :)
Vertualy never used/
Mechanical operation, battery only powers meter. Easily repaired.... I have had one for years. Purchased only to use my favorite lens 17mm f4 full frame fisheye with built in filters. VERY SWEET. If you get a Pentax let me know. I have K mount 24mm & 100mm almost new I never use
I'd vote for the Pentax ME. A sweet fitting camera that feels good and shoot well. With a 50mm smc it will give you satisfaction and good pictures.
ME won't work with dead battery
wlewisiii
12-25-2007, 22:12
ME won't work with dead battery
Which is one of my biggest reasons for loving the Canon T90. Yes, it really is battery dependant. But those batteries are AA that can be found at literally any store or gas station in this nation. Best of all worlds... ;)
William
Just a few thoughts...
I can't say anything about Minolta, because I haven't used one.
My first SLR (back in 1969) was a Pentax Spotmatic, and they're great cameras (and the old Takumar lenses were often excellent). But I don't think I'd recommend one now, because they're a bit long in the tooth and many are now unreliable (the shutter eventually jammed in mine, and it wasn't economical to repair). They also used an old mercury battery that is no longer available.
Pentax K mount cameras are definitely worth buying and using now - I mainly use Olympus OM SLRs, but I also have an MX with a 40mm pancake permanently attached. The MX uses LEDs in the viewfinder though - I prefer a match needle myself. (I think the K1000 has a match needle? But the K1000, with its reputation as an ideal student camera, can be a bit expensive sometimes).
My personal favourite SLRs are my Olympus OM1 and OM2, but there's little to choose between the OM1 and the Pentax MX. The OM1 does have a match needle, but it also uses a mercury battery (I had mine modified to use SR44/LR44 batteries - the OM2 uses SR44/LR44 as standard).
I've used very few Pentax K mount lenses, so I can't really offer much. I love the 40 pancake, for its angle of view and its small size. I've briefly used a 50/1.7 and I found it to be very sharp. The older 28/3.5 is a cracker - possibly one of their best ever lenses (I had an earlier screw-thread Takumar 28/3.5 with my Spotmatic, and I think it is optically the same lens - it was a big favourite). The 28/2.8 is well regarded, but I think the 3.5 has the edge. In fact, if I saw a 28/3.5 going at a reasonable price I'd be tempted - just to carry round in my pocket when I'm out with the MX/40.
I know far more about Olympus Zuiko lenses - I have a good selection and have used more. And I think they're amongst the best in the business.
ME won't work with dead battery
Dunno about ME, but ME Super certainly will work with a dead battery, albeit only at 1/125.
I have and love the MX and ME Super. The problem with the MX, from the OP's point of view, is that the MX uses little lights to meter, and not a match needle. For that reason, I'd probably say K1000 is the best Pentax for the OP.
TBH, Canon FD glass is hard to adapt to other systems, and available very cheaply as a result. One of the best options might be a Canon (e.g. FTb QL) with some of that FD glass.
Dave Wilkinson
12-26-2007, 01:55
Oh dear......no mention of my fav. seventies slr,-the superb Nikkormat FT2! :( I've had one since then, it's never let me down, and never been opened up! :)
-and oh, ....those lovely lenses!!!
Dave.
Here's the web's best(?) resource for the Pentax system:
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/index.html
I have both the K1000 and KX. The KX is the same body but with more bells and whistles- like MLU, DOF preview, and maybe the best part, its meter and viewfinder. Unlike the K1000, it has a true match needle meter and the shutter speed clearly visible in the finder. Just line up the two needles and you're at the recommended exposure. Also (barely) visible is the aperture.
I have two complaints about the KX- it is bulky and a little louder than some cameras. Otherwise, it is built like a tank, simple, and very nicely engineered.
I'm impressed by the detail and thoughtfulness of these responses. Much appreciated.
Does anyone know anything about this bay seller:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Minolta-XD-11-XD11-f1-4-Camera-WITH-30-DAY-GUARANTEE_W0QQitemZ370008580903QQihZ024QQcategoryZ 43486QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
She's offering a 30-day return, and says the camera has been cleaned, new light seals and a new mirror bumper installed.
No, have not had experience with that seller, but.....
Pentax, Canon, Minolta, Oly......Nikon............
Mid to Late 70s all offered very good cameras, very comparable cameras, you may find another as good as this XD-11, but any which are better are only because of personal preference.
My experience is that the quality of all is very close. All made excellent lenses, and they offered very good bodies with features to cater to each user group, all closely competing with each other. All are relatively inexpensive today, I think Minolta is the least expensive having looked at prices for bodies and lenses for all.
I have and love the MX and ME Super.
Yes, they're both excellent - I've used an ME Super (in addition to my MX) and liked it a lot. When I was deciding a few years ago what SLR system to buy cheaply on eBay, I seriously considered an MX/ME Super combination as an alternative to an OM1 & OM2. The thing that swung it was the superior availability at the time of Zuiko lenses - there seemed to be a much better variety available than Pentax lenses.
PS: When I tried an ME Super, the thing I really didn't think I'd like is the shutter speed control in manual mode - those two buttons. But I actually really like it - I find, due to the small size of the camera, the shutter speed dial on the MX can be a bit fiddly to change.
wgerrard
12-26-2007, 06:09
TBH, Canon FD glass is hard to adapt to other systems, and available very cheaply as a result. One of the best options might be a Canon (e.g. FTb QL) with some of that FD glass.
I actually came home from a recent pre-holiday family visit with what had been my father's FTb QL. I was surprised that it still existed almost 40 years on. It's got an FD 50/1.8 and a Vivitar 135. Sadly, it seems to be more than a bit wobbly. The shutter sounds like someone banging on a kitchen pot with a big metal spoon.;)
However, the camera seems a good fit to my hands and, while big by some standards, is easy enough to carry. (The problem is lugging about the body and 3 lenses in a bag.) So, I'll check out the FD line.
shadowfox
12-26-2007, 06:55
Oh dear......no mention of my fav. seventies slr,-the superb Nikkormat FT2! :( I've had one since then, it's never let me down, and never been opened up! :)
-and oh, ....those lovely lenses!!!
Dave.
I picked up a Nikkormat FT2 lying on the table at an Estate sale, with the Nikkor micro lens on it!
Paid half what the tag says (already a bargain) because it was the last hours of the Estate sale :)
What I like about it is that the camera just oozes with class and quality (it's a handsome camera to boot). And the shutter speed is on the lens mount, just like the OMs :D it even has a tab that is easy to use to rotate the ring.
The NIxon FM 3a is a great SLR that's new enough so it shouldn't require any service for years to come. And as someone already mentioned, there are tons of cheap manual focus lenses available.
Steve Bellayr
12-26-2007, 07:28
On any of the older cameras the battery is not the problem. There are numerous solutions and they can be operated without one also. The main problem I have found is the availability of the hoods for the lenses. Though not exorbitant they to tend to be hard to find and a bit on the pricey side. Therefore, I'd consider lens & hood availability.
Since a lot of the suggestions you are getting are not very simple cameras, and some are battery dependant for full operation, I am going to throw two into the mix. I love the Canons, although I have used most of the others. The Canon AE-1 is almost as venerable a student camera as the Pentax K1000, which is the closest camera to your requirements. By "student" I don't mean lesser in any way. I mean a camera that has done long and reliable duty as a teaching instrument for metering and full mechanical operation, where the battery only runs the meter.
Second Canon, the A-1, semi professional and reliable with more automated features. I picked up a mint example w/1.4 lens, extender, and manual recently off Craigslist for $65.
The reason I champion Canon is the huge volume of lens inventory and choices available in the market for very reasonable prices. Top quality most of them.
I do like the Minolta XD, XD7, XD11 and XD5. The first three are identical, while the last one has a couple less features. The XD5 is a real sleeper, usually selling somewhat less than the other 3, but operationally more feature rich than any K1000 Pentax, or Canon AE-1. If you buy a Minolta XD, plan on recovering it. Almost all I have seen have curling edges on the poor quality synthetic covering. This is the only detraction from a truly great camera. But it is a complex camera also.
Frankly, don't spend too much time on this selection. Basic research should show that all the manufacturers in the 70's were advancing their cameras at almost identical clips and with high quality optics. Competition was intense. I don't think you will find many cameras/lenses from Minolta, Olympus, Pentax, Nikon, Canon, Nikkormat, etc that will dissapoint you. Occasionally there were cameras with a chronic issue, but most of these are out of the market now. Very clean, CLA'd models bring consistently similar prices. Interestingly, K1000's and AE-1's bring almost identical and consistent dollars and use the same lenses used on the Pro models.
If you really want the simplest, get the K1000 from Pentax, the AE-1 from Canon, or the Minolta X-370/570. That last one was also a long term student level camera. The essential requirement of student level cameras is full manual operation without the battery dependency. The battery only runs the meter.
I had the mnolta x-370 and I traded it for a Pentax Spotmatic F and never looked back. It was a plastic POS that broke on me twice during a 2 week shoot in Yellowstone, and it took jury rigging to make it work right for the whole thing. I did love the photos it took though, and I tended to use it in aperature priority mode.
Put a spare battery in your camera bag or pocket, and then don't worry about loss of operations with battery dependent cameras. Enjoy the "technology".
I used to get manual cameras, like the Canon F1n, based on the horror stories about battery death in some cameras. What the heck ... get a Pentax MX or ME super or whatever battery dependent camera and stop worrying.
wgerrard
12-28-2007, 15:45
Raid, I'm not worried about batteries. I'd just rather avoid something that was built for mercury batteries.
It's still Minolta vs. Pentax, with Minolta in the lead. The rest are too costly for the purposes of this exercise.
Kim Coxon
12-28-2007, 16:08
My vote would be for the Pentax but then as probably everyone knows, I am strongly biased. :D
Minolta's are not difficult to find but Pentax's are easier. The K mount is much more universal and if you really wanted to, it would give you access to the new Zeiss ZK and CV lenses. Also, if you wanted to add a dSLR body, you would retain the use of the lenses.
Of the various series, my favourites are the KX (A K1000 onsteroids with a much better finder), the MX or if you want some automation including TTL flash, the Super A/Super Program. The LX is a superb system camera but the P series are a retrograde plasticky step.
If you can't find a good one, drop me a line.
Kim
If you ever saw a Minolta and a Pentax disassembled the Pentax would be the obvious choice, in my opinion of course. The K bodies, the MX and of course the LX are pretty much bulletproof. They will last forever. The LX set in the automatic mode has the most incredibly accurate exposures. I will never sell my LX outfit. Stu
Kim Coxon
12-28-2007, 16:27
Especially for night photog. The LX meter is accurate to EV minus 6.5 ;)
Kim
The LX set in the automatic mode has the most incredibly accurate exposures. I will never sell my LX outfit. Stu
It beats it by a couple of evs I think I just read the other day.
I just got over my lust for an LX, let's not start this again. Of course if I could find a black one, maybe with some distinguished brassing....
Kim Coxon
12-28-2007, 16:53
I don't know about the OM4 but the specs in the back of the manual for the OM4Ti says EV5 to EV19 in average mode and EV0 to EV19 in spot mode.
Kim
Kim Coxon
12-28-2007, 17:07
According to the Luna Pro manual specs:
Sensitivity EV-3 to 15 at ISO25
However it shows values outside of this. ;)
Kim
I just checked on my luna pro and thats over one hour @f8 with 400iso !!!:eek:
(And thats not counting reciprocity failure)
Look out for an XK (XM, X-1), Minolta's swing at a pro 35mm SLR.
Kim Coxon
12-28-2007, 17:22
Well you know who to talk to. ;)
You could share the lenses with the K10.:D
Kim
I just got over my lust for an LX, let's not start this again. Of course if I could find a black one, maybe with some distinguished brassing....
I just got over my lust for an LX, let's not start this again. Of course if I could find a black one, maybe with some distinguished brassing....
No brass. Some are titanium, and some are another alloy but no brass. Anyway, the finish is very durable-you'd be hard pressed to wear through it.
However, I would try to find a late one-with the late shutter lock. They don't seem to be plagued by the sticky syndrome.
Like Kim said they meter low light situations like no other camera. The camera measures the light reflected off the curtain and gives you an "estimated" exposure. The actual one which measures cumulative light reflected off the film may vary greatly from the estimated one. Cool camera! You need one.
I would go for Minolta
BUT ... if you were to buy Pentax or Nikon , you could use all your lenses on most digital DSLRs . My Rokkors are useless on any DSLR and I am uncertain about Canon FD . I am adapting my Rokkors for my M 8 - no focusing aids , but full meter operation , but will by buying more S Takumars to complement my Spotmatic 50 f 1.8 to use on a Pentax K 10D ...
I might even buy another manual Pentax before the inheritance is properly wasted !!!
... but then I am certified crazeee dee
I would recommend nikkormat FT2 and non-AI lenses, like 28/F2.0, 50/F2.0, and 85/F2.0 or 105/F2.5. They are cheap, very good quality and easy to find.
I highly second that. The best performance : price relation you may find in the whole camera world is NIKKORMAT EL (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.taunusreiter.de%2FCam eras%2FNikkormat_EL.html&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=de&ie=UTF-8).
http://www.taunusreiter.de/Cameras/nikkormatel03.jpg
If you need a 35mm film camera plus a 35/2.0 lens, you can spend 7000 USD (Leica) or just 100 (this combo)... believe me, from the pictures there will be no major (if any) difference!
The EL has Auto-Exposure and open aperture metering with every Nikon SLR lens made in the 1960's (NON-AI). They are heavy, good to handle (slightly bigger than the FM/FE series), very dependable, and it's even possible to overhaul them. But they are too damn cheap these days to buy that any effort will make sence. And lastly, very seldom have any defects, even after 30 years of use. They are true NIKONS...
In these days (early 70's) the use of electronics was not to cut costs (electronical functions instead of mechanical) but to allow additional features = AE. Once they were new they were quite expensive cameras. Professionals bought them as second body next to their F/F2 to familiarize with AE. They are completely mechanical cameras like the ones in the 1960's plus having electronics onboard. That's why this first generation AE cameras was so heavy. NIKON did it best in terms of longevity.
The NON-AI Lenses are cheap as dirt and excellent as well, both mechanically and optically.
cheers, Frank
Benjamin Marks
12-30-2007, 08:51
I started out in the 1980's with a Pentax K1000 and so have a bias; but I would make a decision based on the glass. For instance, I always felt that the Pentax glass was a little slow for my needs, and over the years migrated to Nikon and then to Leica. But if you look at the used prices on Pentax and Minolta glass at KEH, you'll find many bargains to be had. The Pentax screw-mount stuff, in particular is just being given away these days. A Minolta manual focus 50/1.2 goes for around $200, depending on condition; a Pentax lens of the same specs goes for $144; the Pentax screw mount version goes for $84 and believe me -- the all metal build quality on this lens is just not to be believed. You can't buy a new lens with this much brass in it. And this is with a 90 day warranty and a no-hassle return policy. Just amazing. Easily the best value in 35mm photography today. All IMHO, of course. Good luck with your choice -- there aren't really any bad ones.
Ben Marks
Kim Coxon
12-30-2007, 09:08
I haven't found a problem with the speed of pentax glass. In K mount, they are very few focal lenths where you can get faster from another maker. However, the prices can be quite high. Overall, the quality of Pentax glass may well be one of the best. There are a few "duds" in the budget range and there are some star performers in other ranges but the quality of Pentax glass is consistantly good throughout the range. As to the 50/1.2s, Pentax never made one in M42. The price you quote must be for a 1.4. 3 or 4 years ago, the same M42 lenses were about a 1/3 of the price now. The advent of the dSLRa nd the wide availability of M42 adapters has pushed up the price of Pentax M42 glass no end.
Kim
I started out in the 1980's with a Pentax K1000 and so have a bias; but I would make a decision based on the glass. For instance, I always felt that the Pentax glass was a little slow for my needs, and over the years migrated to Nikon and then to Leica. But if you look at the used prices on Pentax and Minolta glass at KEH, you'll find many bargains to be had. The Pentax screw-mount stuff, in particular is just being given away these days. A Minolta manual focus 50/1.2 goes for around $200, depending on condition; a Pentax lens of the same specs goes for $144; the Pentax screw mount version goes for $84 and believe me -- the all metal build quality on this lens is just not to be believed. You can't buy a new lens with this much brass in it. And this is with a 90 day warranty and a no-hassle return policy. Just amazing. Easily the best value in 35mm photography today. All IMHO, of course. Good luck with your choice -- there aren't really any bad ones.
Ben Marks
ChrisPlatt
12-30-2007, 09:18
FWIW you won't see a vast difference in finder brightness with an ultrafast 50mm,
especially with older manual focus SLRs. Optical performance varies among 50mm
lens models, but you'd be hard pressed to find a bad one from most manufacturers.
I'd go with a 50/1.7, 1.8 or 2.0 and use the savings for something else...
Chris
Benjamin Marks
12-30-2007, 11:23
Kim: You're absolutely right. The 50/1.4's are a K-mount and screw mount respectively. Bad typing on my part. My point was that these are great lenses and available for a song.
charjohncarter
12-30-2007, 11:48
Pentax K1000; my son has one that I bought for him when he was in High School. He is now 35 years old. Millions of lens fit it and the needle match is a dream. I have used my Spotmatic for so many years and I'm so comfortable with it, that it seems easier than some of my automatics.
I think the Minolta is great, too. But you might have a little more trouble with putting the kit together and getting repairs. I may be wrong, I'm looking at it from the Pentax side.
wgerrard
12-30-2007, 12:27
Boy, I never expect to generate a thread of this length when I posted my question. Keep it coming.
Despite the attractiveness of Minolta lenses, the bodies seem too large and heavy for my tastes. So, maybe it will be Pentax.
Basically, Im looking to end up with only two cameras, something for 'serious' shooting and a smaller stick-in-the-pocket camera. I'm rather wary of the reliability and repairability of the electronics in old cameras, so will likely confine my search to models that only use batteries to power the meter.
I'm in no hurry, and need to sell some toys first, so, who knows.
wgerrard
12-30-2007, 19:50
OK. To contradict myself (and why not?) I just agreed to buy what are billed as a very nice XE-7 and four lenses -- MC 50/1.4, MD 45/2, MD 28/2.8 and MC 50/1.7 -- for $250. Let's see how it goes.
Kim Coxon
12-31-2007, 02:07
The fully serviced one I sold recently for $230 was a bargain then. They are very nice lenses but unless you need the speed, I prefer the handing/feel of the 105/2.8.
It used to be that the M42 lenses were a bargain but not anymore. Unless you are only using a Spot or similar, I would go for the SMC Pentax K mount versions. Not that easy to find but better value now that the dSLR users, (especially Canon!) seem to be chasing the M42 ones. Why go for the problems of stop down metering etc when you can have full functionality with exactly the same lens in K mount either at the same price or cheaper?
Kim
PeterM didn't mention the 85/1.8 SMCT which is an absolutely phenomenal lens -- unfortunately good copies go for $300 and up.
Yes I have amended my response to include mention of this one. I have this lens and can attest to its quality. You do not often often see them for sale but when they do come up, as Joe Brugger says, it is not unusual to see them going for over $300 and up to $400 or thereabouts on eBay. Probably a higher price than the Nikon 85mm f 1.8 of the era which is also regarded as being a beauty. I can say it is a nice lens of comparable build quality to the other Taks. It is sharp and has lovely bokeh when shot wide open.
I can rave about these (Takumar) lenses till the cows come home for milking. For many years they have been sleepers. With the exception perhaps of the 85mm they were so common that no one wanted them. I am a bit like ChrisN - part of me would prefer they stay unknown, but I am lucky. I have pretty well all of the Takumar lenses I could ever want and am turning my attention to Nikon and Canon of the era.
Only the oldest Minolta bodies are large and heavy.
wgerrard
12-31-2007, 05:18
The XE-7 deal fell through. Back to window shopping.
Luddite Frank
01-11-2008, 15:22
I picked-up a Minolta XG-1 kit at a rummage sale about five years ago... nice body with the motor-drive, 28 / 45 / 50-1.4 /100-220 Zoom, several flashes, couple of convertors, etc, for $50.
It is my "new" SLR outfit. The glass is all hard to beat, and still plentiful through dealers in used gear or e-bay.
The down-side to the XG-1 is the electronic shutter, and the LED display for the meter. It will operate as Full AE, Aperture-Priority, or manual (using the TTL meter in the camera).
I just received a Minolta SR-1 from e-bay, that I bought primarily for the vintage Heiland Strobonar (pre-Honeywell) flash that was being listed with it.
I was pleasantly surprised when I opened the box and started checking-out the camera; it is a SR- 1 b, from about 1960, and is a full-mechanical, manual SLR. Heck, it doesn't even have an accessory shoe on the body !
There was a clip-on shoe that mounted over the prism housing, and a meter that clipped-over the shutter speed dial, like on a Leica M.
It came with the original Auto-Rokkor PF lenses, a 35mm f:2.8, and a 55 mm f:1.7. It will accept just about every MC / MD lens made since.
The SR series was made from 1959 into the 1970s, and were good yeoman cameras with decent, fast glass, and bright finders.
The earlier SR cameras did not have aperture pre-view levers or mirror lock-up; and models made before 1963, the aperture did not re-open to full until the film was advanced to the next frame.
I went looking for several more early minolta SLR lenses and found at least a dozen on e-Bay, few listing over $100 USD.
I've been very pleased with the pics from my XG-1; I am planning to hacve this SR-1 CLA's and shoot with it... goodness knows I already have plenty of glass that will fit.
Can't knock Pentax; good stuff, many professional photogs in my area used them, one guy even wore-out several Spot-matics !
As for finding a compact/light-weight SLR... that almost seems like a contradiction. But maybe I'm spoiled by all the screw-mount Leicas I've been playing with lately !
I think I'd vote for either the Minolta or Asahi-Pentax, in a pure mechanical... it can be CLA'd for generations to come... if you've got the bucks, the Nikon /Canon are excellent too.
Good luck !
Luddite Frank
( Or you could come over to the "dark side", and get an Exakta !!!! )
ChrisPlatt
01-11-2008, 16:40
Some of the later manual focus Minoltas have problematic plastic wind gears.
Chris
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.