@@leotomma3494yep the K70 is a great camera. Also has really good AF which is not marketed anywhere despite only having 11 AF points, I have a very high hit rate with BIF with the 55-300mm PLM
Another K70 user here! Just bought an MX from Ebay and it is on its way from Japan. Cost £150 (€177). Advertised as "nearly mint" so fingers crossed! My first camera in 1981 was a K1000, which I still own and have started to reuse at family gatherings alongside my K70
Hello Tom. I enjoyed your review of the MX. I still have and use my MX and it's K and M series lenses. I love the camera, it's been a reliable companion for about 40 years. I agree with you about the shutter speed dial, if only Pentax had made it 3mm higher. I love its viewfinder, its so big and bright and one of the best in my opinion. Thank you.
Thanks Paul. Yes, the MX viewfinder is fantastic. It's not just big and bright, but I also love that I get such accurate results even with very fast lenses!
Loved my MX but sold it for an LX which is pretty much the same size as the MX. I also have the KX which I prefer over the MX though the latter has the better viewfinder, I like the KX's form factor which is the same as the K1000 and Spotmatics, and the meter dial (not LEDs).
The KX has a strong following and I guess it's because they're very sturdy cameras. Yes they're based on the Spotmatic chassis, and that's maybe the best that Pentax ever developed! I've recently seen a Pentax K2 with the electronic shutter, which is also gorgeous. I personally also like the analog needles in metering readouts!
One of the joys of the MX is the range of viewfinder screens, the common microprism ring and split image is a bit of a horror with long lenses so it's nice to have alternatives. If you're troubled by the shutter dial, try an ME super, dirt cheap and enormously capable.
Yes, I agree: The ME Super was an instant hit when it came out, and there's a reason why ... Pentax just got it right with that camera. Simple enough but a great feature set, and also a fantastic fast shutter with 1/2000sec and 1/125 flash sync speed! However the MX is a bit more "professional", for example those interchangeable viewfinder screens are missing in the ME Super ...
i picked up p30t recently and the shutter dial is very smooth. i think i will shoot with this more. i must admit the shutter sound is clunky compared to the MX. The MX needs to be used in a quiet environment to be fully appreciated :)
I inherited a Pentax MX and just used it a few weeks ago with Kodak Ektar 100 film. Very nice and with the light sensor and LED's in the viewfinder, my photos came out great.
Yes the readout in the MX viewfinder is very clearly visible and the light meter‘s a pretty accurate one even to today‘s standard. Great to hear you’ve got good results! Ektar is a fantastic film!
Thank you for the video. After using my MX, bought new by me in 1977, I have never noticed a difficulty with the shutter speed dial. I will revisit and perhaps sell it! lol. I have had many other cameras, OM-1, Nikon. My MX is the king. I compared directly to the OM-1 when buying mine, roommate bought the Olympus on the same day. It’s an under rated camera, still a favorite. I just bought an ME Super to keep it company. It is still a favorite travel camera, because it is so small. Keep up the good work!
Thanks for your comment! The OM-1 has some less features, basically cause it’s just a bit older! I do love them both (MX and OM-1) and these are basically my main „user“ systems today. I also got an ME Super in the meantime, I didn’t do a video about it yet but it is also a very underrated, very capable little camera! Thanks again!
I have a ME Super, with a MX and a second ME Super on the way. I also have a K-7 (expensive point and shoot). I enjoy the 2 I currently have, and am anxious to try out the MX.
The ME Super is a very balanced, simple, almost perfect camera in use. I think Pentax just got it right there! The MX is not as perfect, I still find the shutter dial a bit fiddly :) but still I do absolutely love the MX for its all-mechanical beauty!
I love mine - having used it since 1994 and being the tool that made me a photographer. But you are right about the shutter dial. You have all the info so perfectly in the viewfinder but you must use two fingers on the shutter dial. That could have been better designed. In that regard the OM1 is a better design. Something almost no one mentions is that it has perhaps the biggest viewfinder of any SLR, film or digital, with very high magnification - meaning that you use it with both eyes open with a normal lens.
Actually the great thing about the viewfinder is not just the size! It’s also the precision! I can’t really put my finger on it but I find that my focusing is just extremely precise with the Pentax MX … more than with the OM cameras where it’s sometimes a bit inconsistent. Even though the OM‘s also have a huge viewfinder!
I brought the MX camera a few months ago, I own nearly all the Pentax-M lenses and have an adapter to use my m42 1960s lenses on it. Photos come out amazing,
I found a Spotmatic + a Super Takumar 24mm f/3.5 in nice condition two weeks ago for 20€ 😮 bought it immediately 😊 testing it now with some film and it seems to work great
I bought a Pentax MX couple years back and I haven't got to using it yet , I'm using a PENTAX LX lens M which is a 50mm / 1.2 with the original Pentax strap
Oh yes, the Pentax LX is a beauty. I also made a video about it: Pentax LX - the all-time Pentax flagship reviewed! ruclips.net/video/KD5SPksr9BQ/видео.html
Hello Tom, I have an MX and an ME super.... I love them both and just re-discovered them from my basement and they look great ! I will now be getting them filmed up and seeing what they can do ! Thank you for the Kick in the Pants to do so ! OMGosh..... time has gone on so far..... but I'm not a new soul..... But I still want to have some fun with photo shooting. Thanks agn. sbf
Die-hard Pentaxian here. To this very day I still have many of them in use. Namely K1000, KM, KX, MX, LX and 2 MEs, one of them with a winder. BTW, I do not have the issue with the shutter speed dial. Mine runs quite smoothly. Should you be in need of an overhaul, contact ARLÜWA in Cologne. This guy is able to repair almost every mechanical camera in existence...
Hey, Many thanks for your comment! A friend of mine is also a real Pentaxian. He just showed me two of his “several” KX’s … they’re also great bodies and maybe retain a bit more of the Spotmatic’s feel! My current MX works perfectly, thankfully! I know Arlüwa Czens here in Cologne. The thing is, the overhaul of a Pentax MX still is much more expensive than just buying another body. But I guess that will change in just a few years! Today, the MX is still very affordable … but as we all know, prices for analog cameras keep going up and up …
@@tomscameras Yes, they are still relatively cheap, but I wanted my cameras to be technically flawless, therefore I decided to have them overhauled from A-Z. KM, KX and LX are perfect now, K1000 and MX are still at Arlüwa, they'll be ready by the end of June. Apart from the KX, which had a "lemonade accident" some 20 years ago, every camera was in working condition, but as long as there's people being able to perform this kind of work, I'll take advantage of that. Mr. Czens is already 69, though in excellent shape... :D
I had an ME and a MX. I had a couple of different viewfinders that I used for certain purposes. One was ground glass with a grid I think and another with a split center focusing spot. I think that was a feature on the MX and not on the ME. They had a tab on the edge of the glass to pop them out with a special tool and each had it's own case. I don't know if they are available any more.
Yes there are several different focusing screens available for the MX. Back then that was an important “pro” feature! The ME didn’t offer that, yes. Not even the ME Super! Today I think that most of us would stick to the standard screen with split image + micro prism ring, so maybe it doesn’t matter that much any more. But it’s a great feature of the MX nonetheless! Screens are available used, but the more exotic ones are rare!
I really wanted to like the MX because on paper it is my perfect film camera, but that issue with the shutter speed dial truly ruined it for me. At present I am using a Pentax Super A and I plan on giving the P30T a try, but as you have noted, they are not mechanical. The KX is very much on my shortlist and I have a much beloved Spotmatic.
The KX is really a great camera, even though it's not my first love - it's still a fantastic choice. Great viewfinder information, nice feature set, bulletproof mechanics. The viewfinder is a bit smaller than in the MX ... but still very good. I mean, in terms of chassis and viewfinder, it's of course very much like the Spotmatic ...!
I bought my black MX in 1982 as one of the last new cameras then. It replaced my ME Super because I wanted a metal body and manual only. The light meter read-out I found to be very attractive, compared to a needle and the meter itself is very accurate. I still have the MX and will never sell it but I later discovered the OM1 which is a bit smoother to operate and feels a bit more expensive, despite the needle for the meter. I am planning to use a roll of slide film soon and have considered both cameras. I will probably use the MX as the meter will be more accurate than the OM1n which has to be adjusted for the non-availability of the original battery. However, I do have an ME which is a fantastic all metal camera with the same meter and of course my OM2n uses modern batteries. Decisions, decisions.............
Actually, I am personally a fand of the needle readout but of course you are right: The LED readout is more accurate. Also the metering system itself is more modern than the one in the OM-1. The few years between the introduction of these cameras really made a difference! But I'm only shooting negative film so actually it doesn't matter to me so much if the metering is 100% accurate ... One thing that really surprised me is how accurate the focusing of the MX works. So to me it seems that I do get more slightly misfocused results with my OM bodies than with the MX, where focusing is all the time spot-on (if I take the time to properly focus). If I look through the eyepiece, both cameras show a huge and very clear viewfinder image and also the split image is easy to see in both cameras. And still, the MX seems to be more accurate for me. Can't really put my finger on what's going on there ... Anyway, I'm not totally in love with the MX as I said in the video. I prefer the design and the handling of the OM-1. But somehow I tend to grab the MX more often than my OM-1's.
Good review. My MX did not have a stiff shutter dial but was still fiddly - result of the smallness which IMHO was being over-done at that time. Pentax was not sure where to go in 1976. They had only just introduced the K-Series but then started replacing it with the M-Series. They seemed to think a camera should be _entirely_ manual or _entirely_ auto (the 1976 ME and MV were the latter, as was the Olympus OM-10); to be fair some photographers still thought that too. Pentax eventually got it right with the Auto/Manual LX (for pros) and ME-Super (for amateurs). The MX was aimed at pros because as well as an optional winder there was a 5 fps motor drive, also bulk film back, data back etc. But most pros don't attach the greatest priority to smallness, although the MX did appeal to a part of the market for many years, and still does.
I like it for street photography but I have to admit as a person with larger hands the bigger cameras do feel better in the hand. The MX is still useable it's just my pinky will be resting under the camera instead of on the side like the K1000 or FM.
The larger bodies do feel a bit better in your hands, yes! What can help a bit is to use the half case, because it adds a bit of width and height and also it’s softer and more grippy.
Thank you so much for giving your thoughts on the MX-it was exactly as i remembered with the good and really small issues, used to photograph Drama school shows with 400 ISO Film and stage light only, (second camera was K1000) I was stupid enough to give this camera away with the 55mm 1.8 in 2014 , focusing with the split image screen was marvelous, luckily still retained and use the 135mm 2.5 and 28mm 2.8 on my Panasonic mft camera.
The 135/2.5 is a great lens. There were even some different variants: the Pentax K 135/2.5 and a second one that was called "Takumar Bayonet" which has a slightly simpler optical formula (4 vs. 6 lens elements). I never tried out any one of these but I assume they're both very good. Can imagine it was a feat to shoot those school shows with stage light only, back in the day!
@@tomscameras shooting the plays at night was realy hard, was coming to watch one rehersal to spot the important moments/lighting and shoot at the dress rehersal, was developing the images (b&w) in room without AC in hot country....😆 my 135 was non Takumar but had also 110mm Takumr m42 mount.
@@gershonportnoy5589 Your story reminds me of how I shot Vienna night life during a school trip back in 1992, I had a Nikon F at the time with 50/1.4 lens and got ISO 1600 color negative film. It was such a great experience to be able to shoot handheld *at all*, and I remember all my friends didn't bother about weird or funny poses because they all thought the photos are not gonna work out anyway 😆😆 ... still, the images were so grainy and the colors pretty dull! I should have used black&white film instead, but what did I know at the time ...
By the way, that viewfinder slot is, if I am not wrong, called the "Judas' Window" and was wodely used by Voigtländer in its bessamatic range. Incidentally, I used a Pentax ME all through last month. Was a breeze. Next cam will be a Spotmatic (SP or SP-F, or SP 1000, not sure which I will choose).
Thanks for the explanation, I didn’t know it’s called Judas window! I like the original Spotmatic the most, but maybe today it’s easier to find a good /Spotmatic F than the first model. My advice is to check the short times like 1/1000 and 1/500 because on my experience there can be capping after all those years.
Thanks again Thomas, great video. I agree that the MX is a bit of a mixed feeling, whether I like it or not so much (although nothing to really not like! ). I do prefer my Spotmatic or KX, which feel more natural to use. At the same time, the light and compact nature of the MX makes it an easier decision to bring on a hike and there is nothing new to get used to with it's typical pentax layout. I do feel like using the film advance lever is not as nice as the Spotmatic or KX. Thanks again, Kaj
Thanks Kaj! As I say often, I am totally in love with the Spotmatic. But the MX, yes, it is more compact and so easy to carry with me. And of course, let’s face it, the K bayonet is easier in everyday use compared to the screw mount. So I find myself using the MX a lot by now!
I like your review of the MX. I have one and find it just like you have said in your video. I also have a K1000 and KX. I find the KX better to use, it too has a full information viewfinder and the shutter speed can be changed with one finger with the camera to my eye. I have not used my MX for years I find it frustrating. Most of the time I used an ME-Super, a straight forward user experience and accurate.
As you mention the ME Super: I also got one of those by now and yes: Even though I‘m not a huge fan of those old electronics, the ME Super is fantastic and in some ways a more „polished“ design than the MX. Also the bonus 1/2000 top speed and 1/125 flash sync are great sometimes!
I still have my MX I bought way back when. I recently had it serviced, and it's as good as new. I ought to love it more, because it was all I used for many years. But it is a fiddle, and I just find it too small now. I much prefer the Spotmatic, or even the ME.
MX my 1st SLR - beautiful but the wind on always felt a tad long. Purchased instead of an OM1 but I moved on to Nikon for the next 20 years then Canon but now Fuji which returns me to a film like experience 😎
Great review!!! The pentax mx is in my film camera rotation and i think it pairs beautifully with faster lenses like the M50/1.4, M35/2, M28/2, slower lenses like the M50/1.7 are too small for a great grip in focussing. I would avoid f3.5 lenses or slower. By the way one the mx has one of the most precise exposure meter of the camera that i own
Yes, the MX meter was brilliant in its day and still is very good today! Especially when using slide film this matters … but then I wonder how many photographers use slide film today! Actually I am considering the 40/2.8 lens for my MX which is the smallest of them all!
Год назад+1
Thanks for the excellent review, Tomas, I like the mix of history, shooting experience and actual shots made by the camera. I had an ME back in the day, and now I have a variety of Pentax, Olympus and Nikon cameras. Out of these, I like the OM-1 best, it just feels so smooth and has the most exact feel. The MX seem a bit plasticky when comparing. Many ME's and MX's seem to share a problem with the winding of the film. I had to discard some of the used ones I bought cheaply ("not tested") because of this. The MX also seem to have a problem with the shutter indication being off. The small plastic wheel can seem to get misaligned easily it seems. Nevertheless, this does not make the camera useless, just a bit more annoying.
Hello! You're welcome, I'm glad you enjoyed my review. Actually both points are right ... now that you mention it: I also came across a Pentax MX body where the shutter time indicator inside the viewfinder was off. It's a mechanism that is driven by a tiny string inside. On the other hand, many of the old cameras have such mechanisms and can suffer from similar problems today. You always have to check before you buy. I notice this more and more these days, as the cameras are getting oder and older again. I got three Pentax MX bodies until I finally had the good one that you see in my video. The first had a nasty dent in the top plate that the vendor didn't disclose, the second that problem with the shutter speed indicator being off. Light meters, shutter times, focusing were very accurate with all three, though. I was able to sell the two "bad" ones with full disclosure of errors at no financial loss, so I won't complain anyway ... Film transport is okay on my Pentax MX
Just came across your video. Thanks for the information. Like others, I agree the shutter speed dial should have been better (taller?). I don't like the traffic light lightmeter indication - I much prefer the needle system on my SP2 because my eyes are a bit dim and I cannot see .... Still it takes great shots and camera and lenses are a nice small package and easy to carry around, particularly when compared to my main 35mm camera, the Nikon F4.
Thanks for your comment! It’s actually funny that many of us today seem to like the light meter needles more than those LED’s … which, back then, was seen as a big progress! And yes, one of the big advantages of the MX is the small size. I totally agree!
Hi Tom, thak you for your appealing video. When Pentax launched ME and MX in 1976 the latter stood a bit in the ME's shadow. The benefit of automatic exposure was very attractive to most of us. But the MX is classic meanwhile - and the right option for landscape and architecture I think - no moving targets. The issues with setting the shutter speed reminds me to the Canon F-1 which is build quite similar in this part. - Pls go on making content on RUclips!
Hey, many thanks for your comment! Yes, the ME's sold in greater numbers than the MX. I also got an ME Super by now which in addition offers the advantage of the 1/2000 second over the MX. (And adds a manual shutter speed control over the ME.) I do really prefer the all-mechanical SLR cameras but ... yes, the automatic shutter speeds of the ME are a great convenience at times! So I can absolutely see why the photographers back then loved them!
It's a fantastic film I think. Very contrasty and very high resolution, but it doesn't look "clinically sharp" cause there is a faint hint of light blooming around highlights. I totally love the results. The only downside is of course the low ISO (and maybe availabilty, depending on where you live) ...
Hey, many thanks for your feedback! The other great compact Pentax of this vintage is the Pentax ME Super. I've got one now but didn't have the chance yet to shoot a review video about it. I hope I'll be able to do so very soon :)
@@tomscameras You’re welcome sir. That’s nice ! I’ve also considered ME Super but I think the shutter speed is automatic ? In that case the usage would be limited. If there is another alternative ( or better choice ) with a manual shutter speed, plz let me know.
@@yannpoco Yes the ME and ME Super have an electronic shutter, the big difference between the two is that you can also use a manual mode of some sort on the ME Super, the first-generation ME is auto only. The other alternatives to the Pentax MX are the old K series cameras which are a bit bigger but very good and reliable: The KX is is the top model, then there is the more basic KM and the super basic K1000 (which even lacks a self timer). All these three K series cameras are built on the same chassis (almost identical to the older Spotmatic).
It’s pure coincidence that I’m away this week on holidays with my wife and chose to bring my Pentax MX as my main camera shooting Delta 100 (ok got my Fuji X-E4 as well but aim just to use the MX for the week). I think the MX is the Pentax to have from that era. Fully mechanical gives it longevity and they really miniaturised it for these M series cameras. Of course the light meter on some won’t have lasted 40 yrs like mechanics should so watch that when buying this old 2nd hand. What the MX had over it’s competitors was very high viewfinder magnification at 0.97x which for me means it’s one of the most accurate manual focusing cameras I’ve used. Nikon FM is 0.92x and Olympus OM-1 is 0.86x. I agree with you though about the shutter dial… it’s awkward to actuate being so low profile.
Hallo Peter, ja, die MX ist eine gute Alternative zur OM-1. Man muß halt leider mittlerweile bei beiden Kameras schauen, daß man ein gutes Exemplar erwischt :)
@@tomscameras Oder einfach eine kaufen, die einigermaßen funktioniert, und sie dann überholen lassen. Dann ist sie technisch wie neu. Habe ich gerade bei einigen meiner Gehäuse gemacht...
Hi Tom. I have the Minolta SRT 303b (my father's camera) and later I bought the SRT 101 and SRT 100x (the latest and most minimalist). I confess to be a Minolta's fan but in these last days (and watching your videos) I fell in love with the Pentax Spotmatic...!!! I want it to be my next camera!! From Buenos Aires (Argentina). THANKS.
Hi Martin! Actually, a friend of mine lended me his Minolta SRT 101 some weeks ago! It's the first time ever that I use a Minolta SLR camera and it's also a blast! But Spotmatic's are just fantastic nonetheless 😂 ... so I wish you a good hunt! All the best to Buenos Aires!
i gotta serviced mx ready 2 go. an updated K-1000 imo. All mechanical reliability & REPAIRABILITY .. very relevant in 2023. i like the compactness but PERHAPS just maybe, compactness was too much a focus .. even 4 my modest paws I find it a tad "fiddly" also. Still it handles nicely. Light meter's big time accurate & the only electronic element in the camera. The MESuper's smaller .. a tad too small imo. Paired it recently also with a 50m/1.4. I love mine. I got this in response 2 difficulty getting my LX serviced & fixed of "sticky mirror". Eventually on 2nd try got LX fixed .. from the vendor who sold me his MX. Very lucky; a young chap who repairs not just "replaces parts". Btw; very nice Architectural shots .. I was an Architect, a universe ago .. never lose the aesthetic "feel" 4 interesting Architecture😉
Yes the serviceability gets more and more important as the cameras are getting older and older! That’s why I promote mechanical cameras so much. The MX is the successor to the KX which was launched in 1975. The K1000 is a later low cost variant of the KX with a lot of features removed. I personally like the ME as well but yes it is made for small hands. I didn’t shoot the LX yet. It does look awesome and the perfect size as well but sadly “sticky mirror” doesn’t seem to be that uncommon …
Depending on where in the world you are, interesting to know where you got a Pentax camera serviced. It's an increasing problem for all camera brands in this throw-away age. But the LX sticky mirror is relatively easy to solve - just replacing a pair of rubber bumpers, it can be a DiY job. The MX is nothing like an updated K1000, it is more an updated KX (the "X" seems to have meant pro-grade, LX too). The K1000 was a downgraded KM which in turn was an updated Spotmatic SP1000.
@@tomscamerasi MUST content myself with my silvertop MX .. but I want an all-black one .. i will resist .. must get out & shoot NOT collect .. (famous last words🤭). Glad I found the MX👍
Indeed a beautiful camera. I have a Nikon FG; a manual film camera is the perfect tool here in Heuvelland to take stills; plenty of time to fiddle around with settings 😅 Greetings
I actually like the P30. It’s so simple to use. The only downside is that you need the A lenses if you want to make full use pathetic P30’s functions (but then A lenses are also easy to get). It if currently very underrated, just as the SFXn and all those other early AF bodies!
@@tomscameras p30 my first analogue after Zenith ttl. P30 is a fully manual camera with A mode if you had lenses with contacts. Very bright viewfinder and time ladder. ME, a cute baby, but without full manual mode. SFXn is a real beast. And you can also use it to defend yourself against a bad dog
it is a lot of nice 35 camera outhere, but unfortunately, the size of negative is too small to get out some good print out in darkroom. Maybe 16x24, but 30x40 is a challenge. That is the reason i shoot mostly 120.
Ich kann das Video sehr gut nachvollziehen, habe selbst drei MX; trotzdem benutze ich die eher selten - die fühlen sich extrem hochwertig an; das Handling ist aber irgendwie doch nicht ganz ideal, vielleicht auch wegen dem kleinen, niedrigem Body. Aber das Video hat mich inspiriert und ich pack die dieses Wochenende wieder mal ein... Gruss, Andy
A well rounded review. You have graying hair and said "ASA" which mean you are old enough to actually know about manual cameras. The 20-somethings who review them are often in outer space for lack of knowledge and experience, spouting misinformation at an alarming pace. My first camera, 1966, was a Penatx H1a (I've never seen another), the most basic model. I stayed with Pentax bodies/lenses until they changed the lens mounts (LX) then moved to a Canon AE-1 about 1983. After 20+ years of using Canons, I never thought their optics were a good as the old Pentax lenses. When I bought my first digital camera, I also went back to my old MX! And as they say, "lived happily ever after". Its never needed a CLA but I've twice replaced the light seals. For me, the most important assets are the optics available, most at a fraction of original price (adjusted for inflation). Long live Pentax!
Many thanks for your comment! The H1a is a gorgeous classic Pentax camera - they were called S1a over here. (H1a was the designation of the "Honeywell Pentax" sold in the U.S. at the time.) Actually a friend of mine has an S1a! It's a beauty! I'm actually very glad that the young folks are also getting into analog photography these days! And yes, the classic Pentax optics are fantastic! I hope you'll have long lasting pleasure with your Pentax MX!
Pentax "tried to do everything a little better" than Olympus... and failed miserably. OM-1 is still the icon of beauty, superior handling, robust built (it can take a bullet and still work). I love it's simplicity, and never missed the extra displays in the viewfinder, however I am often thankful for mirror lockup which MX lacks. If I were forced to give up all my camera collection (about 20 in total) but one, it would be my OM-1. I would chose it over Leica and even my OM-3Ti.
I admit that the MX has grown on me. Even though I also prefer the looks and the ergonomics of the OM-1! Basically these both are my everyday analog camera systems but for different reasons: (1) Some Pentax lenses are really outstanding and (even) better than their OM Zuiko counterparts: for example the K 28/3.5! (2) the MX has a solid flash hot shoe whereas I basically need another „as-new“ plastic hot shoe for my OM-1 or OM-2 every single time that I want to use a flash, because the plastic today has got so brittle that they always break the first time that you really use them… (3) for reasons I don’t understand, I can focus more reliably with the MX than with the OM‘s. It must have to do something with the way the finder optics are designed and also with my own eyesight as I know that the OM viewfinder is absolutely outstanding (but the MX one also is!) In summertime when I don’t use a flash I tend to grab my OM-1 or OM-2 cause (1) I prefer the design and also cause (2) I have the OM Zuiko 28/2 whereas the Pentax K 28/2 is unreasonably hyped and Uber expensive today… A good friend has some OM-4‘s and they’re awesome, but personally I also prefer the OM-1 or OM-2 over them!
Actually I wanted to shoot a video TODAY about the Pentax ME Super ... but I borrowed my camera to a good friend who wanted to try out analog photography for a short trip so it isn't with me right now :) Anyway, the ME Super is a great alternative to the MX for everyone who's not afraid of vintage electronics and who loves the added convenience of an auto-exposure shutter. In a way I also think it's overall a more balanced design than the MX. And its electronics seem to be very reliable overall as well. So there's lot going for the ME Super. As for the original ME: it misses the manual mode and also the ME Super has a faster shutter (1/2000s + 1/125 flash sync speed). Apart from that, it's a great camera as well. It's also rather underrated if you ask me.
@@63MacGuy oh yes! All amazing cameras! I have to admit my heart always beats for the Spotmatic! But in everyday use, especially the ME Super is actually hard to beat!
I really would love to try the LX one day. It's not "fully mechanical" because the longer shutter times and auto exposure features require a battery, but it is such a carefully and beautifully designed camera!
But the OM 1-2-3-4 are more ergonomical as small slr's as you have exposure ring where focus and apperture is so you dont have to change grip for settings. But the ME Super is a very strong competitor in this department.. very ergonomical
The Spotmatic is my favourite camera too. Mine is a charming black paint model, with just the right amount of brassing. Lately I'm into earlier Pentax models pre-dating the Spotmatic. The S3 I bought this week has aesthetically pleasing design, slightly smaller than the Spotmatic which is robust and feels reliable in the hands. It is generally agreed that the MX is Pentax's flagship professional SLR but the limitations of earlier models give different shooting experience. I don't buy vintage cameras and expect them to function like normal. Mine suffers the problem of sticky shutter and requires CLA. Could you tell me if there is someone in Koln who can repair old Pentax SLR? I live near you just across the border. BTW, Do you have any news about Pentax bringing out a new film camera?
Yes, these cameras are getting old and it is just natural that they have maintenance issues today. It is amazing that so many of the bodies still work at all, after all those years! In Cologne, there is Arlüwa Czens: www.arluewa.de In the Netherlands, maybe ask Amsterdam Camera Repairs: www.amsterdamcamerarepairs.com I hope this helps!
I would of said that the LX was the flagship. I was a proud owner of a Pentax MX from 1979 up until I swapped over to the Canon EF system in the mid 90s. I vey much regret getting rid of it.
or you could go the other way and use a Nikon F90/90x, F100 or any Canon prosumer EOS film camera. Still reasonably light, have manual controls, have AF if you want that, and you can use new/newish lenses.
Hello Thomas. Why everyone are talking very frequently of analog cameras . Will be the next goal ? I still have 2 analogs Olympus OM-1 and OM-10, and working
Hey José, many thanks for your comment! I think many of us are rediscovering analog photography again today. It's like a trend maybe. The OM-1 is a great camera! I wish you a lot of fun with yours! And did you see my video about the OM-1 already? ruclips.net/video/jvQtmhFMHWM/видео.html
Yes, the Sony A7 series is a near-perfect platform for shooting vintage glass, cause they are very affordable, they all have IBIS and you can adapt anything you want! And these days, you also get a lot of native FE-mount manual focus lenses for Sony in addition to all the vintage glass. The only disadvantage is that the corners of the frame might be a bit unsharp especially with wide-angle lenses because of the Sony sensor's glass filter stack.
Nice camera, I owned it in the 1980s in parallel to the OM-1 but especially to my favourite Nikons which were much more sturdy and superior suitable for daily heavy duty use. Today I still prefer my Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP 'black beauty' (now only with Super Takumar 2.8/105mm). My former K-lenses were 3.5/15mm (superb!), 2.8/28 (small but with great optics!), 2/40 (not so fine, too flat and very fiddly), 1.7/50 (handsome standard), 1.8/85 (my favourite standard), 2/85 (not as fine), 3.5/150 (very good but with a wrong, cheaply made focal aperture lever which snapped), and Zoom 4.5/80-200 (throughout amazing near to Nikon's). @philosimot
Back in the 90s, I also definitely preferred the Nikon's because they were a bit more sturdy and also were supported anywhere: If you needed an exotic lens for a job, you'd just ask photographer friends or rent it in the next store! Today, where I shoot these cameras more for fun and personal photography projects, I value the smaller size and sometimes more refined or sophisticated details of some of the other brands cameras. The Spotmatic is one of my all-time favorite cameras. I still cannot point out why. Today I also do prefer it over the Nikons even though some of the Spotmatic details are definitely a bit more dated, and M42 lens changes definitely take more time! :)
At about 17 years of age - late 1960s - the Pentax Spotmatic was my dream camera, but my father was fixed on 'Made-In-Germany' gear like Voigtlaender and Zeiss Ikon Contaflex; so I got those. In 1971, I started to go pro with the Nikon F and have had no regrets until now. But as a sideline I tried almost all other brands and formats, and in 2023, I grabbed the chance at length and purchased the object of desire > the mentioned Asahi Pentax Spotmatic. I fully agree: It's the graceful shape of Pentaxes in combination with stunning lenses and their special colour rendering. By the way: I still like my Voigtlaender Vitomatic II anyway;-))@@tomscameras
I've often wondered about the fascination with making cameras smaller. Smaller cameras are so much more fiddly to operate, especially for people with larger hands. Rather like the tiny Nokia mobile phones of the early 2000's.
I think there's a couple reasons for wanting a small camera. * Most obvious is the practical: if your camera body is smaller and lighter, you can more easily carry it around, and can have more space for something like an extra body or some more lenses (I am sure a lot of pros would have typically carried at least two of these cameras). * There's a particular aesthetic that the MX has (along with the OM-x and some others of its time), that simply works best in a smaller body. A kind of elegance, that is hard to pull off in a much bigger camera. This is not so important when you're actually using it, but ultimately people are senstive to this stuff and will choose a more elegant/nice looking camera even if it is less convenient to use. * People being photographed respond differently to different cameras. Most people will be less bothered or influenced by a small camera than a big one. Depending on the type of photography you do this can be a huge deal. As an aside, I think this is also part of why rangefinders are disproportionately succesful in street photography, as lay-people don't seem to recognize rangefinders as 'serious' cameras (as opposed to SLRs).
I think @SylphDS you already gave a great answer. I have to admit I think that Pentax overdid it just a little bit with the MX. Things start to feel a bit "packed". Maybe the guys over at Olympus were just better at designing a compact SLR? But the OM-1 design is also controversial: Not everyone loves the shutter dial around the lens mount (but I personally LOVE it !!). Back in the 1990s, I loved my rugged, heavy, trusty Nikkormat and Nikon F bodies. Today, I really appreciate a camera that is a bit smaller and more light weight. Because, as you say, it's definitely easier to carry around! I don't think it makes a big difference though if you carry the Pentax MX or a Nikon FM, for example. On the other hand, Pentax also offered that unique 40/2.8 pancake lens. Maybe I should get one of these, it transforms the MX almost into a point&shoot camera, you can't do that with your average Nikon or even Olympus ... 😃
@@tomscameras Olympus does have a 40/2 lens, but that thing is a unicorn and sells for four-digit Dollar or Euro amounts. The Voigtländer 40/2 lens for Nikon can replicate the same experience for Nikons, especially with the FM/FE series.
@@studiosnch I have a friend who owns that Zuiko 40/2. it’s funny that it was intended as a low-cost lens originality… I am not sure if the Voigtländer 40/2 was also produced with K mount. It’s a great lens even though the Pentax 40/2.8 still is much smaller!
@@tomscameras Ken Rockwell mentioned in his review that the Voigt 40/2 was only for Nikon F as an AI-S lens and for Canon EF. But I'm with you on saying that the K-mount 40/2,8 has its own uniqueness that stands it apart from either Zuiko or the Voigtländer. Also I forgot to mention that Canon has its own 40/2,8 for EF, but it is STM meaning that it focuses by wire.
I‘ve heard that there were reliability problems with the MX when it came out. I hope all the bad ones have been sorted out by now, 40-50 years later. The FM is a classic workhorse and maybe there’s a reason why the FM series became such a long lasting success! I have got two MX by now that work well and I have come to like them a lot. It’s also because of the Pentax lenses, there are some true gems out there. (Not that Nikkor glass wouldn’t be fantastic as well, though!)
It depends on what you are looking for: the KX ist the most robust of the three, but it is also more heavy and big than the other two and (despite its size) has a slightly smaller and darker viewfinder. The ME Super is a fantastic light weight camera and also it’s very convenient in use as it offers aperture-priority automatic exposure and a fast shutter with 1/2000 second and 1/125 second flash sync. I would not get the ME without „Super“. The MX is very compact and still all-mechanical. The advantage over the KX is that you get a slightly larger and more bright viewfinder and also interchangeable focusing screens. In the end it’s a matter of taste which one you prefer :)
![Twenty One Pilots - The Line (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XCz7WUotXs8/mqdefault.jpg)
One of the best cameras ever made. I regret having sold mine, but I love my K-70.
I'm shooting digital Fuji X by now, but I still have fond memories of my Pentax *istD and K10D, which was the very first one with IBIS in 2007!
I too love my K-70, great flip monitor and I also use full frame lenses, great improvement
@@leotomma3494yep the K70 is a great camera. Also has really good AF which is not marketed anywhere despite only having 11 AF points, I have a very high hit rate with BIF with the 55-300mm PLM
Another K70 user here! Just bought an MX from Ebay and it is on its way from Japan. Cost £150 (€177). Advertised as "nearly mint" so fingers crossed! My first camera in 1981 was a K1000, which I still own and have started to reuse at family gatherings alongside my K70
I still use the MX, it's great and easy to use. I got big hands and the shutter dial is not an issue, I guess I got used to it over time.
That's the thing: If everything else is great on a camera and you use it a lot, you just get used to small imperfections. :)
Hello Tom. I enjoyed your review of the MX. I still have and use my MX and it's K and M series lenses. I love the camera, it's been a reliable companion for about 40 years. I agree with you about the shutter speed dial, if only Pentax had made it 3mm higher. I love its viewfinder, its so big and bright and one of the best in my opinion. Thank you.
Thanks Paul. Yes, the MX viewfinder is fantastic. It's not just big and bright, but I also love that I get such accurate results even with very fast lenses!
Loved my MX but sold it for an LX which is pretty much the same size as the MX. I also have the KX which I prefer over the MX though the latter has the better viewfinder, I like the KX's form factor which is the same as the K1000 and Spotmatics, and the meter dial (not LEDs).
The KX has a strong following and I guess it's because they're very sturdy cameras. Yes they're based on the Spotmatic chassis, and that's maybe the best that Pentax ever developed! I've recently seen a Pentax K2 with the electronic shutter, which is also gorgeous. I personally also like the analog needles in metering readouts!
I have 4 Canon AE1+P cameras - but I adore the MX. I have K1000 / ME SE / ME Super and the MX - the MX is just superb.
Especially the viewfinder in the MX (but also in the ME) is really fantastic!
One of the joys of the MX is the range of viewfinder screens, the common microprism ring and split image is a bit of a horror with long lenses so it's nice to have alternatives.
If you're troubled by the shutter dial, try an ME super, dirt cheap and enormously capable.
Yes, I agree: The ME Super was an instant hit when it came out, and there's a reason why ... Pentax just got it right with that camera. Simple enough but a great feature set, and also a fantastic fast shutter with 1/2000sec and 1/125 flash sync speed!
However the MX is a bit more "professional", for example those interchangeable viewfinder screens are missing in the ME Super ...
i picked up p30t recently and the shutter dial is very smooth. i think i will shoot with this more. i must admit the shutter sound is clunky compared to the MX. The MX needs to be used in a quiet environment to be fully appreciated :)
I inherited a Pentax MX and just used it a few weeks ago with Kodak Ektar 100 film. Very nice and with the light sensor and LED's in the viewfinder, my photos came out great.
Yes the readout in the MX viewfinder is very clearly visible and the light meter‘s a pretty accurate one even to today‘s standard. Great to hear you’ve got good results! Ektar is a fantastic film!
Thank you for the video. After using my MX, bought new by me in 1977, I have never noticed a difficulty with the shutter speed dial. I will revisit and perhaps sell it! lol. I have had many other cameras, OM-1, Nikon. My MX is the king. I compared directly to the OM-1 when buying mine, roommate bought the Olympus on the same day. It’s an under rated camera, still a favorite. I just bought an ME Super to keep it company. It is still a favorite travel camera, because it is so small. Keep up the good work!
Thanks for your comment! The OM-1 has some less features, basically cause it’s just a bit older! I do love them both (MX and OM-1) and these are basically my main „user“ systems today. I also got an ME Super in the meantime, I didn’t do a video about it yet but it is also a very underrated, very capable little camera! Thanks again!
I have a ME Super, with a MX and a second ME Super on the way. I also have a K-7 (expensive point and shoot). I enjoy the 2 I currently have, and am anxious to try out the MX.
The ME Super is a very balanced, simple, almost perfect camera in use. I think Pentax just got it right there! The MX is not as perfect, I still find the shutter dial a bit fiddly :) but still I do absolutely love the MX for its all-mechanical beauty!
Somewhere tucked away I've got my grandfather's old MX (and tucked away somewhere else is my K1000). I may have to get those out again!
They’re both fantastic! I hope they‘ll be both working perfectly after the long storage!
I love this kind of vintage lenses video. Thank you for sharing. Please keep making them.
Many thanks for your feedback, I really appreciate it!
Another great video work Tom. Thanks for bringing back the great photo history. Nothing beats b/w film pictures.
Thank you for the feedback! And I agree: analog black&white images are something special!
I love mine - having used it since 1994 and being the tool that made me a photographer. But you are right about the shutter dial. You have all the info so perfectly in the viewfinder but you must use two fingers on the shutter dial. That could have been better designed. In that regard the OM1 is a better design.
Something almost no one mentions is that it has perhaps the biggest viewfinder of any SLR, film or digital, with very high magnification - meaning that you use it with both eyes open with a normal lens.
Actually the great thing about the viewfinder is not just the size! It’s also the precision! I can’t really put my finger on it but I find that my focusing is just extremely precise with the Pentax MX … more than with the OM cameras where it’s sometimes a bit inconsistent. Even though the OM‘s also have a huge viewfinder!
I brought the MX camera a few months ago, I own nearly all the Pentax-M lenses and have an adapter to use my m42 1960s lenses on it. Photos come out amazing,
There’s a lot of great Pentax glass, also in M42!
I found a Spotmatic + a Super Takumar 24mm f/3.5 in nice condition two weeks ago for 20€ 😮 bought it immediately 😊 testing it now with some film and it seems to work great
Wow now that‘s a deal! 😀
Thanks Tom! I just ordered an MX. I haven’t taken a photo on film in maybe 26 years or so! I’m looking forward to trying it out.
That sounds nice! Did you get it from a camera store?
I bought a Pentax MX couple years back and I haven't got to using it yet , I'm using a PENTAX LX lens M which is a 50mm / 1.2 with the original Pentax strap
Oh yes, the Pentax LX is a beauty. I also made a video about it:
Pentax LX - the all-time Pentax flagship reviewed!
ruclips.net/video/KD5SPksr9BQ/видео.html
Hello Tom, I have an MX and an ME super.... I love them both and just re-discovered them from my basement and they look great !
I will now be getting them filmed up and seeing what they can do !
Thank you for the Kick in the Pants to do so !
OMGosh..... time has gone on so far..... but I'm not a new soul..... But I still want to have some fun with photo shooting.
Thanks agn.
sbf
Now that spring is around the corner, it's really time to blow off the dust of the analog cameras again and start to use them !
I have got a me super . I was thinking an additional gear . Do u recommend the MX or sud i go for another brand
Die-hard Pentaxian here. To this very day I still have many of them in use. Namely K1000, KM, KX, MX, LX and 2 MEs, one of them with a winder. BTW, I do not have the issue with the shutter speed dial. Mine runs quite smoothly. Should you be in need of an overhaul, contact ARLÜWA in Cologne. This guy is able to repair almost every mechanical camera in existence...
Hey, Many thanks for your comment! A friend of mine is also a real Pentaxian. He just showed me two of his “several” KX’s … they’re also great bodies and maybe retain a bit more of the Spotmatic’s feel! My current MX works perfectly, thankfully! I know Arlüwa Czens here in Cologne. The thing is, the overhaul of a Pentax MX still is much more expensive than just buying another body. But I guess that will change in just a few years! Today, the MX is still very affordable … but as we all know, prices for analog cameras keep going up and up …
@@tomscameras Yes, they are still relatively cheap, but I wanted my cameras to be technically flawless, therefore I decided to have them overhauled from A-Z. KM, KX and LX are perfect now, K1000 and MX are still at Arlüwa, they'll be ready by the end of June. Apart from the KX, which had a "lemonade accident" some 20 years ago, every camera was in working condition, but as long as there's people being able to perform this kind of work, I'll take advantage of that. Mr. Czens is already 69, though in excellent shape... :D
I had an ME and a MX. I had a couple of different viewfinders that I used for certain purposes. One was ground glass with a grid I think and another with a split center focusing spot. I think that was a feature on the MX and not on the ME. They had a tab on the edge of the glass to pop them out with a special tool and each had it's own case. I don't know if they are available any more.
Yes there are several different focusing screens available for the MX. Back then that was an important “pro” feature! The ME didn’t offer that, yes. Not even the ME Super! Today I think that most of us would stick to the standard screen with split image + micro prism ring, so maybe it doesn’t matter that much any more. But it’s a great feature of the MX nonetheless! Screens are available used, but the more exotic ones are rare!
I really wanted to like the MX because on paper it is my perfect film camera, but that issue with the shutter speed dial truly ruined it for me. At present I am using a Pentax Super A and I plan on giving the P30T a try, but as you have noted, they are not mechanical. The KX is very much on my shortlist and I have a much beloved Spotmatic.
The KX is really a great camera, even though it's not my first love - it's still a fantastic choice. Great viewfinder information, nice feature set, bulletproof mechanics. The viewfinder is a bit smaller than in the MX ... but still very good. I mean, in terms of chassis and viewfinder, it's of course very much like the Spotmatic ...!
the shutter sound is clunky p30t and super a
I bought my black MX in 1982 as one of the last new cameras then. It replaced my ME Super because I wanted a metal body and manual only. The light meter read-out I found to be very attractive, compared to a needle and the meter itself is very accurate. I still have the MX and will never sell it but I later discovered the OM1 which is a bit smoother to operate and feels a bit more expensive, despite the needle for the meter. I am planning to use a roll of slide film soon and have considered both cameras. I will probably use the MX as the meter will be more accurate than the OM1n which has to be adjusted for the non-availability of the original battery. However, I do have an ME which is a fantastic all metal camera with the same meter and of course my OM2n uses modern batteries. Decisions, decisions.............
Actually, I am personally a fand of the needle readout but of course you are right: The LED readout is more accurate. Also the metering system itself is more modern than the one in the OM-1. The few years between the introduction of these cameras really made a difference! But I'm only shooting negative film so actually it doesn't matter to me so much if the metering is 100% accurate ...
One thing that really surprised me is how accurate the focusing of the MX works. So to me it seems that I do get more slightly misfocused results with my OM bodies than with the MX, where focusing is all the time spot-on (if I take the time to properly focus).
If I look through the eyepiece, both cameras show a huge and very clear viewfinder image and also the split image is easy to see in both cameras. And still, the MX seems to be more accurate for me. Can't really put my finger on what's going on there ...
Anyway, I'm not totally in love with the MX as I said in the video. I prefer the design and the handling of the OM-1. But somehow I tend to grab the MX more often than my OM-1's.
Great camera, I have it and also a ME super and a LX. I have just loaded the LX with color film and will load the MX with black and white.
Good review.
My MX did not have a stiff shutter dial but was still fiddly - result of the smallness which IMHO was being over-done at that time. Pentax was not sure where to go in 1976. They had only just introduced the K-Series but then started replacing it with the M-Series. They seemed to think a camera should be _entirely_ manual or _entirely_ auto (the 1976 ME and MV were the latter, as was the Olympus OM-10); to be fair some photographers still thought that too. Pentax eventually got it right with the Auto/Manual LX (for pros) and ME-Super (for amateurs).
The MX was aimed at pros because as well as an optional winder there was a 5 fps motor drive, also bulk film back, data back etc. But most pros don't attach the greatest priority to smallness, although the MX did appeal to a part of the market for many years, and still does.
Thanks for your comment. Yes, from today's point of view, the MX is caught between two stools (
If I remember correctly there were interchangeable focusing screens for the mx.
I like it for street photography but I have to admit as a person with larger hands the bigger cameras do feel better in the hand. The MX is still useable it's just my pinky will be resting under the camera instead of on the side like the K1000 or FM.
The larger bodies do feel a bit better in your hands, yes! What can help a bit is to use the half case, because it adds a bit of width and height and also it’s softer and more grippy.
Thank you so much for giving your thoughts on the MX-it was exactly as i remembered with the good and really small issues, used to photograph Drama school shows with 400 ISO Film and stage light only, (second camera was K1000) I was stupid enough to give this camera away with the 55mm 1.8 in 2014 , focusing with the split image screen was marvelous, luckily still retained and use the 135mm 2.5 and 28mm 2.8 on my Panasonic mft camera.
The 135/2.5 is a great lens. There were even some different variants: the Pentax K 135/2.5 and a second one that was called "Takumar Bayonet" which has a slightly simpler optical formula (4 vs. 6 lens elements). I never tried out any one of these but I assume they're both very good. Can imagine it was a feat to shoot those school shows with stage light only, back in the day!
@@tomscameras shooting the plays at night was realy hard, was coming to watch one rehersal to spot the important moments/lighting and shoot at the dress rehersal, was developing the images (b&w) in room without AC in hot country....😆 my 135 was non Takumar but had also 110mm Takumr m42 mount.
@@gershonportnoy5589 Your story reminds me of how I shot Vienna night life during a school trip back in 1992, I had a Nikon F at the time with 50/1.4 lens and got ISO 1600 color negative film. It was such a great experience to be able to shoot handheld *at all*, and I remember all my friends didn't bother about weird or funny poses because they all thought the photos are not gonna work out anyway 😆😆 ... still, the images were so grainy and the colors pretty dull! I should have used black&white film instead, but what did I know at the time ...
@@tomscameras 😎
By the way, that viewfinder slot is, if I am not wrong, called the "Judas' Window" and was wodely used by Voigtländer in its bessamatic range.
Incidentally, I used a Pentax ME all through last month. Was a breeze. Next cam will be a Spotmatic (SP or SP-F, or SP 1000, not sure which I will choose).
Thanks for the explanation, I didn’t know it’s called Judas window! I like the original Spotmatic the most, but maybe today it’s easier to find a good /Spotmatic F than the first model. My advice is to check the short times like 1/1000 and 1/500 because on my experience there can be capping after all those years.
Thanks again Thomas, great video. I agree that the MX is a bit of a mixed feeling, whether I like it or not so much (although nothing to really not like! ). I do prefer my Spotmatic or KX, which feel more natural to use. At the same time, the light and compact nature of the MX makes it an easier decision to bring on a hike and there is nothing new to get used to with it's typical pentax layout. I do feel like using the film advance lever is not as nice as the Spotmatic or KX. Thanks again, Kaj
Thanks Kaj! As I say often, I am totally in love with the Spotmatic. But the MX, yes, it is more compact and so easy to carry with me. And of course, let’s face it, the K bayonet is easier in everyday use compared to the screw mount. So I find myself using the MX a lot by now!
I like your review of the MX. I have one and find it just like you have said in your video. I also have a K1000 and KX. I find the KX better to use, it too has a full information viewfinder and the shutter speed can be changed with one finger with the camera to my eye. I have not used my MX for years I find it frustrating. Most of the time I used an ME-Super, a straight forward user experience and accurate.
As you mention the ME Super: I also got one of those by now and yes: Even though I‘m not a huge fan of those old electronics, the ME Super is fantastic and in some ways a more „polished“ design than the MX. Also the bonus 1/2000 top speed and 1/125 flash sync are great sometimes!
I still have my MX I bought way back when. I recently had it serviced, and it's as good as new. I ought to love it more, because it was all I used for many years. But it is a fiddle, and I just find it too small now. I much prefer the Spotmatic, or even the ME.
The ME‘s advantage is that it’s just „point & shoot“ thanks to the auto exposure so you don’t need to fiddle around with a shutter speed dial 😀
MX my 1st SLR - beautiful but the wind on always felt a tad long. Purchased instead of an OM1 but I moved on to Nikon for the next 20 years then Canon but now Fuji which returns me to a film like experience 😎
Your story sounds a bit like mine, at least regarding Fuji! And when I was younger, I also shot analog Nikons for many years!
Great review!!! The pentax mx is in my film camera rotation and i think it pairs beautifully with faster lenses like the M50/1.4, M35/2, M28/2, slower lenses like the M50/1.7 are too small for a great grip in focussing. I would avoid f3.5 lenses or slower.
By the way one the mx has one of the most precise exposure meter of the camera that i own
Yes, the MX meter was brilliant in its day and still is very good today! Especially when using slide film this matters … but then I wonder how many photographers use slide film today!
Actually I am considering the 40/2.8 lens for my MX which is the smallest of them all!
Thanks for the excellent review, Tomas, I like the mix of history, shooting experience and actual shots made by the camera. I had an ME back in the day, and now I have a variety of Pentax, Olympus and Nikon cameras. Out of these, I like the OM-1 best, it just feels so smooth and has the most exact feel. The MX seem a bit plasticky when comparing. Many ME's and MX's seem to share a problem with the winding of the film. I had to discard some of the used ones I bought cheaply ("not tested") because of this. The MX also seem to have a problem with the shutter indication being off. The small plastic wheel can seem to get misaligned easily it seems. Nevertheless, this does not make the camera useless, just a bit more annoying.
Hello! You're welcome, I'm glad you enjoyed my review. Actually both points are right ... now that you mention it: I also came across a Pentax MX body where the shutter time indicator inside the viewfinder was off. It's a mechanism that is driven by a tiny string inside. On the other hand, many of the old cameras have such mechanisms and can suffer from similar problems today. You always have to check before you buy. I notice this more and more these days, as the cameras are getting oder and older again.
I got three Pentax MX bodies until I finally had the good one that you see in my video. The first had a nasty dent in the top plate that the vendor didn't disclose, the second that problem with the shutter speed indicator being off. Light meters, shutter times, focusing were very accurate with all three, though. I was able to sell the two "bad" ones with full disclosure of errors at no financial loss, so I won't complain anyway ...
Film transport is okay on my Pentax MX
Just came across your video. Thanks for the information. Like others, I agree the shutter speed dial should have been better (taller?). I don't like the traffic light lightmeter indication - I much prefer the needle system on my SP2 because my eyes are a bit dim and I cannot see .... Still it takes great shots and camera and lenses are a nice small package and easy to carry around, particularly when compared to my main 35mm camera, the Nikon F4.
Thanks for your comment! It’s actually funny that many of us today seem to like the light meter needles more than those LED’s … which, back then, was seen as a big progress! And yes, one of the big advantages of the MX is the small size. I totally agree!
Hi Tom, thak you for your appealing video. When Pentax launched ME and MX in 1976 the latter stood a bit in the ME's shadow. The benefit of automatic exposure was very attractive to most of us. But the MX is classic meanwhile - and the right option for landscape and architecture I think - no moving targets. The issues with setting the shutter speed reminds me to the Canon F-1 which is build quite similar in this part. - Pls go on making content on RUclips!
Hey, many thanks for your comment! Yes, the ME's sold in greater numbers than the MX. I also got an ME Super by now which in addition offers the advantage of the 1/2000 second over the MX. (And adds a manual shutter speed control over the ME.)
I do really prefer the all-mechanical SLR cameras but ... yes, the automatic shutter speeds of the ME are a great convenience at times! So I can absolutely see why the photographers back then loved them!
Great review. Thanks for mentioning a film i never heard of, Babylon 13 - now i want to experiment with it.
It's a fantastic film I think. Very contrasty and very high resolution, but it doesn't look "clinically sharp" cause there is a faint hint of light blooming around highlights. I totally love the results. The only downside is of course the low ISO (and maybe availabilty, depending on where you live) ...
I love your video for its high quality. I’m looking for a compact Pentax so it is very useful. You are very elegant as well. I’m a fan now.
Hey, many thanks for your feedback! The other great compact Pentax of this vintage is the Pentax ME Super. I've got one now but didn't have the chance yet to shoot a review video about it. I hope I'll be able to do so very soon :)
@@tomscameras You’re welcome sir. That’s nice ! I’ve also considered ME Super but I think the shutter speed is automatic ? In that case the usage would be limited. If there is another alternative ( or better choice ) with a manual shutter speed, plz let me know.
@@yannpoco Yes the ME and ME Super have an electronic shutter, the big difference between the two is that you can also use a manual mode of some sort on the ME Super, the first-generation ME is auto only. The other alternatives to the Pentax MX are the old K series cameras which are a bit bigger but very good and reliable: The KX is is the top model, then there is the more basic KM and the super basic K1000 (which even lacks a self timer). All these three K series cameras are built on the same chassis (almost identical to the older Spotmatic).
It’s pure coincidence that I’m away this week on holidays with my wife and chose to bring my Pentax MX as my main camera shooting Delta 100 (ok got my Fuji X-E4 as well but aim just to use the MX for the week). I think the MX is the Pentax to have from that era. Fully mechanical gives it longevity and they really miniaturised it for these M series cameras. Of course the light meter on some won’t have lasted 40 yrs like mechanics should so watch that when buying this old 2nd hand.
What the MX had over it’s competitors was very high viewfinder magnification at 0.97x which for me means it’s one of the most accurate manual focusing cameras I’ve used. Nikon FM is 0.92x and Olympus OM-1 is 0.86x. I agree with you though about the shutter dial… it’s awkward to actuate being so low profile.
Das richtige Video zur rechten Zeit, jetzt hab ich gute Alternativen falls ich die OM-1 nicht bekomme. Die Fotos sprechen für sich. Danke dafür 👍
Hallo Peter, ja, die MX ist eine gute Alternative zur OM-1. Man muß halt leider mittlerweile bei beiden Kameras schauen, daß man ein gutes Exemplar erwischt :)
@@tomscameras Oder einfach eine kaufen, die einigermaßen funktioniert, und sie dann überholen lassen. Dann ist sie technisch wie neu. Habe ich gerade bei einigen meiner Gehäuse gemacht...
Hi Tom. I have the Minolta SRT 303b (my father's camera) and later I bought the SRT 101 and SRT 100x (the latest and most minimalist). I confess to be a Minolta's fan but in these last days (and watching your videos) I fell in love with the Pentax Spotmatic...!!! I want it to be my next camera!! From Buenos Aires (Argentina). THANKS.
Hi Martin! Actually, a friend of mine lended me his Minolta SRT 101 some weeks ago! It's the first time ever that I use a Minolta SLR camera and it's also a blast! But Spotmatic's are just fantastic nonetheless 😂 ... so I wish you a good hunt! All the best to Buenos Aires!
Thanks Tom...!!! 🙏🏼✨🙌🏼
i gotta serviced mx ready 2 go. an updated K-1000 imo. All mechanical reliability & REPAIRABILITY .. very relevant in 2023. i like the compactness but PERHAPS just maybe, compactness was too much a focus .. even 4 my modest paws I find it a tad "fiddly" also. Still it handles nicely. Light meter's big time accurate & the only electronic element in the camera. The MESuper's smaller .. a tad too small imo. Paired it recently also with a 50m/1.4. I love mine. I got this in response 2 difficulty getting my LX serviced & fixed of "sticky mirror". Eventually on 2nd try got LX fixed .. from the vendor who sold me his MX. Very lucky; a young chap who repairs not just "replaces parts".
Btw; very nice Architectural shots .. I was an Architect, a universe ago .. never lose the aesthetic "feel" 4 interesting Architecture😉
Yes the serviceability gets more and more important as the cameras are getting older and older! That’s why I promote mechanical cameras so much. The MX is the successor to the KX which was launched in 1975. The K1000 is a later low cost variant of the KX with a lot of features removed. I personally like the ME as well but yes it is made for small hands. I didn’t shoot the LX yet. It does look awesome and the perfect size as well but sadly “sticky mirror” doesn’t seem to be that uncommon …
Depending on where in the world you are, interesting to know where you got a Pentax camera serviced. It's an increasing problem for all camera brands in this throw-away age. But the LX sticky mirror is relatively easy to solve - just replacing a pair of rubber bumpers, it can be a DiY job. The MX is nothing like an updated K1000, it is more an updated KX (the "X" seems to have meant pro-grade, LX too). The K1000 was a downgraded KM which in turn was an updated Spotmatic SP1000.
@@tomscamerasi MUST content myself with my silvertop MX .. but I want an all-black one .. i will resist .. must get out & shoot NOT collect .. (famous last words🤭). Glad I found the MX👍
Indeed a beautiful camera. I have a Nikon FG; a manual film camera is the perfect tool here in Heuvelland to take stills; plenty of time to fiddle around with settings 😅
Greetings
Btw. You’ve also taken a few good shots, even if it’s for the video.
Thanks for your comment! By the way, did you see my Nikon FG video already? :)
ruclips.net/video/MKMNMPRDzpo/видео.html
Best manual SLR ever IMO. I agree they made the shutter dial detents a little too stiff.
Yes, but then nobody is perfect 😃
Thanks for this interesting and nice video!!
You’re welcome! I’m glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for your feedback and support!
I had SRL Pentax: p30, Me. Now SFXn. All great analog cameras
I actually like the P30. It’s so simple to use. The only downside is that you need the A lenses if you want to make full use pathetic P30’s functions (but then A lenses are also easy to get). It if currently very underrated, just as the SFXn and all those other early AF bodies!
@@tomscameras
p30 my first analogue after Zenith ttl. P30 is a fully manual camera with A mode if you had lenses with contacts. Very bright viewfinder and time ladder. ME, a cute baby, but without full manual mode. SFXn is a real beast. And you can also use it to defend yourself against a bad dog
it is a lot of nice 35 camera outhere, but unfortunately, the size of negative is too small to get out some good print out in darkroom. Maybe 16x24, but 30x40 is a challenge. That is the reason i shoot mostly 120.
120 is such a great format when it comes to developing film or making prints, yes!
Had mine since 1976 when the price war was on cost £150.00 👌😎☕️
Nothing beats being the first owner of such a great camera! I hope you’re still enjoying to use it to this day!
@@tomscameras thanks
Ich kann das Video sehr gut nachvollziehen, habe selbst drei MX; trotzdem benutze ich die eher selten - die fühlen sich extrem hochwertig an; das Handling ist aber irgendwie doch nicht ganz ideal, vielleicht auch wegen dem kleinen, niedrigem Body.
Aber das Video hat mich inspiriert und ich pack die dieses Wochenende wieder mal ein... Gruss, Andy
I like the MX but love the ME Super. Faster and more convenient.
I have to admit you’re right. I like the MX more but the ME Super is better for what it is supposed to be!
A well rounded review. You have graying hair and said "ASA" which mean you are old enough to actually know about manual cameras. The 20-somethings who review them are often in outer space for lack of knowledge and experience, spouting misinformation at an alarming pace.
My first camera, 1966, was a Penatx H1a (I've never seen another), the most basic model. I stayed with Pentax bodies/lenses until they changed the lens mounts (LX) then moved to a Canon AE-1 about 1983. After 20+ years of using Canons, I never thought their optics were a good as the old Pentax lenses. When I bought my first digital camera, I also went back to my old MX! And as they say, "lived happily ever after". Its never needed a CLA but I've twice replaced the light seals.
For me, the most important assets are the optics available, most at a fraction of original price (adjusted for inflation). Long live Pentax!
Many thanks for your comment! The H1a is a gorgeous classic Pentax camera - they were called S1a over here. (H1a was the designation of the "Honeywell Pentax" sold in the U.S. at the time.) Actually a friend of mine has an S1a! It's a beauty!
I'm actually very glad that the young folks are also getting into analog photography these days! And yes, the classic Pentax optics are fantastic! I hope you'll have long lasting pleasure with your Pentax MX!
Pentax "tried to do everything a little better" than Olympus... and failed miserably. OM-1 is still the icon of beauty, superior handling, robust built (it can take a bullet and still work). I love it's simplicity, and never missed the extra displays in the viewfinder, however I am often thankful for mirror lockup which MX lacks. If I were forced to give up all my camera collection (about 20 in total) but one, it would be my OM-1. I would chose it over Leica and even my OM-3Ti.
I admit that the MX has grown on me. Even though I also prefer the looks and the ergonomics of the OM-1! Basically these both are my everyday analog camera systems but for different reasons:
(1) Some Pentax lenses are really outstanding and (even) better than their OM Zuiko counterparts: for example the K 28/3.5!
(2) the MX has a solid flash hot shoe whereas I basically need another „as-new“ plastic hot shoe for my OM-1 or OM-2 every single time that I want to use a flash, because the plastic today has got so brittle that they always break the first time that you really use them…
(3) for reasons I don’t understand, I can focus more reliably with the MX than with the OM‘s. It must have to do something with the way the finder optics are designed and also with my own eyesight as I know that the OM viewfinder is absolutely outstanding (but the MX one also is!)
In summertime when I don’t use a flash I tend to grab my OM-1 or OM-2 cause (1) I prefer the design and also cause (2) I have the OM Zuiko 28/2 whereas the Pentax K 28/2 is unreasonably hyped and Uber expensive today…
A good friend has some OM-4‘s and they’re awesome, but personally I also prefer the OM-1 or OM-2 over them!
Great video! Where does the ME and ME Super fit into the Pentax lineup?
Actually I wanted to shoot a video TODAY about the Pentax ME Super ... but I borrowed my camera to a good friend who wanted to try out analog photography for a short trip so it isn't with me right now :)
Anyway, the ME Super is a great alternative to the MX for everyone who's not afraid of vintage electronics and who loves the added convenience of an auto-exposure shutter. In a way I also think it's overall a more balanced design than the MX. And its electronics seem to be very reliable overall as well. So there's lot going for the ME Super.
As for the original ME: it misses the manual mode and also the ME Super has a faster shutter (1/2000s + 1/125 flash sync speed). Apart from that, it's a great camera as well. It's also rather underrated if you ask me.
@@tomscameras the ME Super was my very 1st camera (I now have 3 of them) one ME, 3 K1000's and 2 Spotmatics.
@@63MacGuy oh yes! All amazing cameras! I have to admit my heart always beats for the Spotmatic! But in everyday use, especially the ME Super is actually hard to beat!
It was my first with the LX👌📷
I really would love to try the LX one day. It's not "fully mechanical" because the longer shutter times and auto exposure features require a battery, but it is such a carefully and beautifully designed camera!
@@tomscameras The LX is an excellent camera. I've got one of these, too. I live near Cologne, just in case you might want to give it a go...
But the OM 1-2-3-4 are more ergonomical as small slr's as you have exposure ring where focus and apperture is so you dont have to change grip for settings. But the ME Super is a very strong competitor in this department.. very ergonomical
Nothing to hate about this legend (well, maybe the synch speed).
Hehe, yes! But then that 1/60 second is the same as the current Leica M models :)
The Spotmatic is my favourite camera too. Mine is a charming black paint model, with just the right amount of brassing. Lately I'm into earlier Pentax models pre-dating the Spotmatic. The S3 I bought this week has aesthetically pleasing design, slightly smaller than the Spotmatic which is robust and feels reliable in the hands. It is generally agreed that the MX is Pentax's flagship professional SLR but the limitations of earlier models give different shooting experience. I don't buy vintage cameras and expect them to function like normal. Mine suffers the problem of sticky shutter and requires CLA. Could you tell me if there is someone in Koln who can repair old Pentax SLR? I live near you just across the border. BTW, Do you have any news about Pentax bringing out a new film camera?
Yes, these cameras are getting old and it is just natural that they have maintenance issues today. It is amazing that so many of the bodies still work at all, after all those years!
In Cologne, there is Arlüwa Czens:
www.arluewa.de
In the Netherlands, maybe ask Amsterdam Camera Repairs:
www.amsterdamcamerarepairs.com
I hope this helps!
I would of said that the LX was the flagship. I was a proud owner of a Pentax MX from 1979 up until I swapped over to the Canon EF system in the mid 90s. I vey much regret getting rid of it.
Yes, you are absolutely right: But the LX came in 1980, and before that, the MX was the latest & greatest they had :)
or you could go the other way and use a Nikon F90/90x, F100 or any Canon prosumer EOS film camera. Still reasonably light, have manual controls, have AF if you want that, and you can use new/newish lenses.
Hi, the Super A picture is wrong.
Wow, well spotted! You’re right :)
Pentax LX + SMC focal lengths.
Yes, the Pentax lenses are really amazing!
Hello Thomas. Why everyone are talking very frequently of analog cameras . Will be the next goal ? I still have 2 analogs Olympus OM-1 and OM-10, and working
Hey José, many thanks for your comment! I think many of us are rediscovering analog photography again today. It's like a trend maybe. The OM-1 is a great camera! I wish you a lot of fun with yours! And did you see my video about the OM-1 already?
ruclips.net/video/jvQtmhFMHWM/видео.html
I have a MX its great it looks amazing..... But I prefer the Spotmatic
I understand you very well! 😀
Do you always use yellow filter in from of lens?
Shot H1 from new in 1957 40 years until lost. MX is better.
Wow, 40 years with the same camera, that's quite a story! I bet the MX is better ... but I do love the M42 Pentax cameras a lot!
I like using vintage lenses on my Sony A7ii.
Yes, the Sony A7 series is a near-perfect platform for shooting vintage glass, cause they are very affordable, they all have IBIS and you can adapt anything you want!
And these days, you also get a lot of native FE-mount manual focus lenses for Sony in addition to all the vintage glass.
The only disadvantage is that the corners of the frame might be a bit unsharp especially with wide-angle lenses because of the Sony sensor's glass filter stack.
Nice camera, I owned it in the 1980s in parallel to the OM-1 but especially to my favourite Nikons which were much more sturdy and superior suitable for daily heavy duty use. Today I still prefer my Asahi Pentax Spotmatic SP 'black beauty' (now only with Super Takumar 2.8/105mm). My former K-lenses were 3.5/15mm (superb!), 2.8/28 (small but with great optics!), 2/40 (not so fine, too flat and very fiddly), 1.7/50 (handsome standard), 1.8/85 (my favourite standard), 2/85 (not as fine), 3.5/150 (very good but with a wrong, cheaply made focal aperture lever which snapped), and Zoom 4.5/80-200 (throughout amazing near to Nikon's). @philosimot
Back in the 90s, I also definitely preferred the Nikon's because they were a bit more sturdy and also were supported anywhere: If you needed an exotic lens for a job, you'd just ask photographer friends or rent it in the next store!
Today, where I shoot these cameras more for fun and personal photography projects, I value the smaller size and sometimes more refined or sophisticated details of some of the other brands cameras.
The Spotmatic is one of my all-time favorite cameras. I still cannot point out why. Today I also do prefer it over the Nikons even though some of the Spotmatic details are definitely a bit more dated, and M42 lens changes definitely take more time! :)
At about 17 years of age - late 1960s - the Pentax Spotmatic was my dream camera, but my father was fixed on 'Made-In-Germany' gear like Voigtlaender and Zeiss Ikon Contaflex; so I got those. In 1971, I started to go pro with the Nikon F and have had no regrets until now. But as a sideline I tried almost all other brands and formats, and in 2023, I grabbed the chance at length and purchased the object of desire > the mentioned Asahi Pentax Spotmatic. I fully agree: It's the graceful shape of Pentaxes in combination with stunning lenses and their special colour rendering. By the way: I still like my Voigtlaender Vitomatic II anyway;-))@@tomscameras
I've often wondered about the fascination with making cameras smaller. Smaller cameras are so much more fiddly to operate, especially for people with larger hands. Rather like the tiny Nokia mobile phones of the early 2000's.
I think there's a couple reasons for wanting a small camera.
* Most obvious is the practical: if your camera body is smaller and lighter, you can more easily carry it around, and can have more space for something like an extra body or some more lenses (I am sure a lot of pros would have typically carried at least two of these cameras).
* There's a particular aesthetic that the MX has (along with the OM-x and some others of its time), that simply works best in a smaller body. A kind of elegance, that is hard to pull off in a much bigger camera. This is not so important when you're actually using it, but ultimately people are senstive to this stuff and will choose a more elegant/nice looking camera even if it is less convenient to use.
* People being photographed respond differently to different cameras. Most people will be less bothered or influenced by a small camera than a big one. Depending on the type of photography you do this can be a huge deal. As an aside, I think this is also part of why rangefinders are disproportionately succesful in street photography, as lay-people don't seem to recognize rangefinders as 'serious' cameras (as opposed to SLRs).
I think @SylphDS you already gave a great answer. I have to admit I think that Pentax overdid it just a little bit with the MX. Things start to feel a bit "packed". Maybe the guys over at Olympus were just better at designing a compact SLR? But the OM-1 design is also controversial: Not everyone loves the shutter dial around the lens mount (but I personally LOVE it !!).
Back in the 1990s, I loved my rugged, heavy, trusty Nikkormat and Nikon F bodies. Today, I really appreciate a camera that is a bit smaller and more light weight. Because, as you say, it's definitely easier to carry around! I don't think it makes a big difference though if you carry the Pentax MX or a Nikon FM, for example. On the other hand, Pentax also offered that unique 40/2.8 pancake lens. Maybe I should get one of these, it transforms the MX almost into a point&shoot camera, you can't do that with your average Nikon or even Olympus ... 😃
@@tomscameras Olympus does have a 40/2 lens, but that thing is a unicorn and sells for four-digit Dollar or Euro amounts. The Voigtländer 40/2 lens for Nikon can replicate the same experience for Nikons, especially with the FM/FE series.
@@studiosnch I have a friend who owns that Zuiko 40/2. it’s funny that it was intended as a low-cost lens originality… I am not sure if the Voigtländer 40/2 was also produced with K mount. It’s a great lens even though the Pentax 40/2.8 still is much smaller!
@@tomscameras Ken Rockwell mentioned in his review that the Voigt 40/2 was only for Nikon F as an AI-S lens and for Canon EF. But I'm with you on saying that the K-mount 40/2,8 has its own uniqueness that stands it apart from either Zuiko or the Voigtländer.
Also I forgot to mention that Canon has its own 40/2,8 for EF, but it is STM meaning that it focuses by wire.
I bought a MX when it first came out. Unreliable from day one. Sold it and my much better K2 and bought a Nikon Fm. Much better camera.
I‘ve heard that there were reliability problems with the MX when it came out. I hope all the bad ones have been sorted out by now, 40-50 years later. The FM is a classic workhorse and maybe there’s a reason why the FM series became such a long lasting success! I have got two MX by now that work well and I have come to like them a lot. It’s also because of the Pentax lenses, there are some true gems out there. (Not that Nikkor glass wouldn’t be fantastic as well, though!)
What did the camera fail to do?
Mine from new 1976 never had an issue still use it 😊
much better camera with almost identical technical specifications, but in a larger, more agricultural form factor and costs twice as much 👍
Just traded my beloved MX for a KP...
Pro-tip: The MX fits PERFECTLY in an OM10 half case...
Oh thanks for the tip! Gotta check that out!
@@tomscameras The OM-10 is HAPPY to make the contribution... Lol
@@punkrachmaninoff 😂
kx me mx你更推荐那个
It depends on what you are looking for: the KX ist the most robust of the three, but it is also more heavy and big than the other two and (despite its size) has a slightly smaller and darker viewfinder.
The ME Super is a fantastic light weight camera and also it’s very convenient in use as it offers aperture-priority automatic exposure and a fast shutter with 1/2000 second and 1/125 second flash sync. I would not get the ME without „Super“.
The MX is very compact and still all-mechanical. The advantage over the KX is that you get a slightly larger and more bright viewfinder and also interchangeable focusing screens.
In the end it’s a matter of taste which one you prefer :)