• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Becoming a Pentax enthusiast


I think it's great that you found something you're happy with. Of course, every brand has its fans and all cameras have their pros and cons. I'm very happy with my Nikons(FMsFEs,N70 and D800) plus all the lenses. Mostly love their exposure accuracy and the lensquality,; but horses for courses.
 

Well but my favorite is Nikon. I owned some old Canons but I never really use them except testing them out.
 
I have always been a Nikon user, but in the day, I started shooting for stock libraries, so purchased a couple of 67 MU bodies and gradually, acquired most of the lens range. Absolutely amazing cameras and incredible images when viewed on a light-box. Owing to the increasing cost of film with a 67, i then purchased a 645 and used my 67 lenses. As the smaller format only used the central portion of the 67 lenses, those Velvia images were razor sharp.

I never got into submitting digital stock , still have my film cameras in storage; nowadays, am using a Nikon D300.

Since I fancy undertaking a new hobby of camera restoration, I acquired some of the necessary tools and bought both a Pentax 75-150 zoom and an S1A non-working body. A few YouTube vids later and I have managed to get the camera working; it just needed cleaning and a bit of lubrication. Now it seems a shame to learn by dismantling a fully functioning camera.

As for the lens, to date, that seems a bigger challenge but if it becomes 'non-working' in the process, so be it. All good fun!!!
 

I like Pentax but I'd rather have the 'Cuda.
 
Did not know that the 50 1.8 has a thorium element.
If you mean the 55mm f/1.8 Super Takumar lens, the ones in the 1971 era did have at least one thorium element. My wife's 1971 Spotmatic included such a lens. It has amazing resolution. I do not know if the thorium formulation extended into the production of SMC lenses in 1972 or 1973. I have a late 55 1.8 SMC that has remained clear, so no thorium element.
 
That's not a comprehensive list, but its focus is "thorium" glass.
 
Yeah, your right, I've seen other lists over the years with additional lens listed.
 
I didn't settle on Pentax back in the day. More Leica & Nikon. Although i did use an LX with 24mm and 80-200 on a trip to Nepal alongside my Leica M6. I did try out the MX... but it didn't stick... I preferred some of the Nikon lenses.
Lately though I have Pentax 645 (manual version) which is a killer camera and a M42 50mm 1.4 which i use wide open (love the character) on its lens holder a black S2.
 

Welcome to the club
Sportmatics are like my "safety blanket" The camera I always come back to
 
The first 35mm camera I ever used (like many) was the K1000, back in high school. I have a sentimental connection with it. I was never into photography, but I needed a camera to document my art work, and it was also a way to photograph interesting comps, and use them as references for my drawings. I picked one up for 80 loonies at a pawn shop back in '88. That was a lot of money for me then, as I was wrapping up my BFA, and had very little funds. That camera started to take over my life, and before you know it, I was hooked. Over the past decade, I've added a Spotmatic, a couple of ME's, a Super ME, and an MX. I also have a back up K1000, just in case. I have no complaints really, about any of them.
 
For example—Canon lenses turn the wrong way when focusing and setting aperture. My Pentax, Nikkor, and Bronica lenses all turn the correct way. (Though the Nikkor turn the wrong way to mount the lens bayonet…)

That's funny, since that was one thing I thought was odd about Pentax lenses when i first got into them. They all seemed to turn in the wrong direction.
 

Same Canon user here.

Looking back I would rather say Canon have spend lots on advertising, making themselves as if one of the most reliable camera maker.

My friend had replaced his AE-1 twice within a week and finally got his refund in early 1980s. He was so disappointed and decided to get a Minolta. He never looked back to any Canon even today.

At that time I thought it was just his bad luck, but now seeing people complain about reliability and defects like my friend that had , I believe it is all about QC.
 
My first serious camera was a Spotmatic II with the famous 1.8/55mm. Great camera and lens. Later I added some Carl Zeiss Jena lenses.

Later I switched to a ME super. Enjoyed the winder with the excellent ergonomics (grip). Later came the LX. What a fantastic camera!

The lenses were not easy to find, but they are of great quality. I owned:

3.5/18
2/35
2.8/40
1.2/50
1.8/85
2.8/105
2.5/135
2.5/200
4/300 A*

I sold everything in the early 2000s and switched to digital. Burnt a lot of money. Regret it very much.

Today I am back analogue with both Spotmatic II and Praktica MTL5. Lenses by Carl Zeiss Jena again. But I have some nice SMC Takumar M42 lenses now:

3.5/15
1.4/50
1.8/55
1.8/85
2.5/135
4/200
4/300

The "wrong" focusing direction is annoying. But the optical and mechanical quality is outstanding.



 

I don't, but will need to be doing this same job on my 2nd MX. I have the light seal kit on hand from US Camera out of Colorado. I'm used to light seals being fairly simple. This one will be a bit of a puzzle.

The shutter speed dials on my MXs are definitely more stiff than my KX. Not so much so that I cannot rotate with the shutter finger, but it does take some effort. On one of my MXs, the shutter speed indicator is off one stop in the viewfinder. I've been going over the service manual and am not sure if there's an adjustment cam for the tungsten cord under the top cover. I'm hoping there is, but the lack of mention of one makes me think that there is not. I don't like adjusting cords via knots. I've never been a fly fisher and struggle with accurate knots.
 
...And another KX followed me home today. This one needs a CLA and light seals but looks good otherwise.
 

My first SLR was the Canon EOS3 that served me really well until I got a hold of the Pentax MX.

EOS3-MX by Les DMess, on Flickr

One look through that huge viewfinder - largest magnification on a fixed prism SLR, and I became a Pentax enthusiast
 
...And another KX followed me home today. This one needs a CLA and light seals but looks good otherwise.

Was it meowing when it followed you?

Anyway, the shots on negative film from my newly acquired Pentax turned out good and no light leaks but I will send it to a shop for mirror foam replacement. The light seals on the side of the mirror, I don't think I can do it myself.
 
Sorry, I just rechecked that and it's the 55, not the 50. Sorry for the confusion there.
Yes, it is documented in Gerjan vanOosten book, some of the lenses that have thorium glass:
50mm f/1.4 (7 element version), 20mm f/4.5, 35mm f/2, 55mm f/1.8, 55mm f/2 and 85mm f/1.8.

Most of the radiation is alpha-type and it is stopped by the other lens elements and the viewfinder
The 55/1.8 doesnt yellow, the 50.1,4 does but its cured easily with bright light
There are many references (academic and casual) about this phenomenon which was observed in FermiLab by the US Army in the late 40s.
 
Is that tiny one a 110 camera? I used to just shoot plastic disposable 110 cameras back in the day!

Not quite, Les. The Minox format is MUCH smaller than the 110 format -- and much more capable with focusing lens and adjustable shutter speeds, etc.

 
Last edited:
I have been a long time Nikon user, but recently got encountered by Pentax. The MX with the SMC-M 50/1.7 is such a nice compact combination that I will be happy to carry everywhere.