Harmless, easy and quick survey for long time film users

[cuthbert]

OK, these threads are dangerous! I now own five Pentaxes having just bought an MX. Please don't mention the medium format Pentaxes, I just cannot afford it. (Yes, I know, but I don't do will-power.)

You're an amateur!

I own:

1) three Spotmatic Fs (my favourite "simple" camera)
2) a SP1000
3) a H3V (still have to try it, came with the black SPF)
4) a 1976 K1000
5) A brown leatherette K1000SE
6) KM
7) KX
8) K2
9) K2DMD (marvellous camera)
10) LX
11) MX
12) Super A

The first thing that comes in my mind when I think about Pentax is small, the second is quality, the third flexibility. IMO a Spottie is a better camera than a Nikkormat or a FTb, the five Ks are strong, robust and reliable cameras, the LX is superior to anything besides the F1N.

I would like to get a medium format but alas they are still expensive.

 

[ColColt]

Also, the P67 / P6x7 prices are still low, so you MUST BUY A PENTAX 6X7 RIGHT NOW...

Agree-a little eye candy for those contemplating...my latest acquisition.

P6x7 by David Fincher, on Flickr

And, the wonderful 75 f4.5

75f4.5 by David Fincher, on Flickr

 

[cuthbert]

LOOKS HEAVY!

 

[ColColt]

Like the camera, it's just on steroids.

 

[Alan Klein]

Pentax was another 35mm SLR camera maker. I seem to recall Asahi Pentax name also. But I bought a Nikon F Photomic T in 1965 based on the recommendations in the photo magazines at the time. Subsequently I bought Nikormat FTN. I really didn;t know much about other SLR cameras beside Nikon.

 

[Cycler]

Also-ran maker using big promotional budget to try to overtake the big boys. Also tended to have low regard for potential customers.

 

[cuthbert]

Also-ran maker using big promotional budget to try to overtake the big boys. Also tended to have low regard for potential customers.

If you say so...

 

[monkowa]

Pentax was my dream camera when I was a kid. I used to dream of the Honeywell Pentax and the potato masher Honeywell Strobonar. Was so cool. But when I bought my first camera it was a Nikon F2AS. In recent years I have a few old Pentax and I think they are very good.

And please no K1000. If someone is willing to pay for shipping he/she can have my K1000 and the 50mm f/2 (I think this lens was designed for the K1000).

I'll take that K1000 off your hands if the offer still stands!

 

[monkowa]

If you have been using film for a long time, that is before the digital age, I would like you to help me with a casual survey that take mere seconds. The question is:

When you think of Pentax from the film era, what are the first things that come to mind?

Simple and short answers are the best, please. And preferably in the order you think of them. This came up as a topic of discussion recently.

Thanks so much.

Small, durable. Awesome lenses. The K1000's I've used are built like tanks. I have two ME's that i still use for candids and street.
My very first camera was a garage sale P3 that I still own. I haven't used it in ages though.

 

[Bruce Osgood]

When you think of Pentax from the film era, what are the first things that come to mind?

Spot Meter

 

[Chrismat]

I have read that in 2001 Herbert Keppler compared a Super Multicoated Takumar 50mm 1.4 lens against a Summicron and came to the conclusion that the Tak was just as good as the Summicron.

When I think of Pentax I think of the great Takumar lenses and cameras that just feel good in my hands (my favorite, the KX). I own a variety of models plus my first medium format camera, the Pentax 6X7.

Of course, I also think of the Beatles with their Pentaxes. Being a Beatles fan growing up, that could have helped me with my decision to go with Pentax when I bought my first slr, a K1000.

 

[cuthbert]

I have read that in 2001 Herbert Keppler compared a Super Multicoated Takumar 50mm 1.4 lens against a Summicron and came to the conclusion that the Tak was just as good as the Summicron.

I personally think the SMC Tak is a better lens than the Summicron. I have both.

 

[GRHazelton]

I have read that in 2001 Herbert Keppler compared a Super Multicoated Takumar 50mm 1.4 lens against a Summicron and came to the conclusion that the Tak was just as good as the Summicron.

When I think of Pentax I think of the great Takumar lenses and cameras that just feel good in my hands (my favorite, the KX). I own a variety of models plus my first medium format camera, the Pentax 6X7.

Of course, I also think of the Beatles with their Pentaxes. Being a Beatles fan growing up, that could have helped me with my decision to go with Pentax when I bought my first slr, a K1000.

It is well and fitting that The Fab Four aided your choice of the Proper Path, that of Pentax.

 

[Chrismat]

I remember when I was at the store looking for a camera, I was thinking of getting a Nikon, but it was 1982 and the choice at the store was a Nikon EM, and I think a Nikon FG. I didn't like the EM (aperture priority only and small) and the FG was too much money for me at the time. As I was holding the K1000 I remember thinking: 'If Pentax is good enough for the Beatles, it's good enough for me.'

Just for the record, I own a couple of Nikkormats and love them.

 

[r.reeder]

K-1000. I have several & still use them.

 

[1L6E6VHF]

Fine, reliable SLR cameras with an uncanny ability to fit nicely in the hand, with silky-smooth controls, fitting a wide range of good optics.

A company that let us transition from screw to bayonet with just a mount adapter, then from manual focus to autofocus without rendering all our MF lenses obsolete.

OTOH: They were about 7 years behind Minolta in full-aperature metering.
I was unimpressed with the AF in my ZX-7 (AKA MZ-7). Sometimes it would not find the focus, and the shutter would not trip at all.

On-topic question: Other than the obvious handicap in XL photography, how did the 55/1.4 Super Tak compare with my 55/1.8? (I'm very happy with mine). How does the 50/1.7 A (bayonet) compare with either?

I have a loaded ME Super as I type this.

 

[cuthbert]

Fine, reliable SLR cameras with an uncanny ability to fit nicely in the hand, with silky-smooth controls, fitting a wide range of good optics.

A company that let us transition from screw to bayonet with just a mount adapter, then from manual focus to autofocus without rendering all our MF lenses obsolete.

OTOH: They were about 7 years behind Minolta in full-aperature metering.
I was unimpressed with the AF in my ZX-7 (AKA MZ-7). Sometimes it would not find the focus, and the shutter would not trip at all.

On-topic question: Other than the obvious handicap in XL photography, how did the 55/1.4 Super Tak compare with my 55/1.8? (I'm very happy with mine). How does the 50/1.7 A (bayonet) compare with either?

I have a loaded ME Super as I type this.

I don't know what the Tak 55m f1.4 is, but if you are talking about the Tak 50/1.4 for me it's the best 1.4 of its era, in comparison to the 55 mm 1.8 (other great lens) the DOF is shallower, usually it's warmer (more radioactive material= yellower), sharpness is similar.

Both lenses are better than the M 50 mm f1.7 IMO.

For being being Minolta, if I remember correctly the latter has a bayonet, and implementing full open metering with M42 is a challenge, just three brands made it.