Minolta or Pentax. One System has to go.

[Helge]

You didn't say but what bodies do you have in the Minolta system? I would keep the Pentax system if I have the KX, MX or LX. I had the XK in the Minolta system but I sold it because I found that it's worth a lot more money than I like it. The XD-11 I do like but not as much as the Pentax. The SRT are good and reliable but I do not like them much especially if I want cameras with meter.

The XE is every bit as good as the KX.
MX has some nice features and is pretty well build, but ultimately is not very ergonomic and is of course completely manual.
Super Program/Super A is my Pentax of choice, but just feels less well build than the X-700, and the 2000 speed is of very limited use. Especially since the flash sync doesn’t follow troop.
There is very little to touch the X-700 and XD-7/11 for crucial features like advanced metering, bright finder, smoothness of shutter and mirror and exposure hold.

 

[Mogens]

I can't think of a rationale to choose one over the other. So I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that it might be fun to abandon both systems and switch to something else. Perhaps picking up a nice Nikon F3HP and a range of lenses or a Rolleiflex would bring you down some different paths. I bought a screwmount Leica here on the classifieds last May and I've found it an interesting departure from my SLRs.

 

[Pioneer]

Which old friend to you want to abandon on the street? I began with a Pentax H1a 60 yrs ago, and later gave MX's to family members, so would vote to keep that system.

That is the biggest part of the problem Drew. I still have and use that old H1a...and that pawnshop K1000. The SRT-101 is not the same one I bought right out of high school, that one was stolen, but it was a replacement.

 

[Pioneer]

Both are great camera systems and it does not cost you more money to keep both. So keep both.

You do have a good point and that suggestion has been made before.

After reading through all of this I may try to pick some of the best from both systems. One Minolta and one Pentax with a small assortment of lenses for both may work.

Some of the equipment has already been stored away in boxes or camera bags.

 

[4season]

Hmm, I wonder if when later, I opened the box, my recollections of snowy Christmas mornings and Kodachrome, might just make matters worse

I didn't say that OP should fondle the gear and reminisce, because that could be exactly the sort of behavior which lead up to the OP's predicament in the first place. One possibility is to pack those boxes in a manner that's ready for shipping, and to do exactly that if the contents aren't sorely missed after say 6 months.

 

[xkaes]

Don't forget the 28/3.5, I actually preferred that one over my MC 28/2.8.

I thought I was the only one that used the 28mm f3.5. Minolta made NINE versions of the 28mm f3.5 -- and if you can find one, it usually sells for much less than the f2.8 versions.

I have the MC Rokkor-X version which has a 7/7 design and a 55mm filter thread -- but is a little bit smaller and lighter than the f2.8 version. Great for a small, light camera, like an XG.

http://www.subclub.org/minman/2835.htm

 

[xkaes]

After reading through all of this I may try to pick some of the best from both systems. One Minolta and one Pentax with a small assortment of lenses for both may work.

Why not "let your lenses decide". For example, if your Pentax collection is strong on the wide-angle side, just keep the Pentax wide-angle lenses and the best Pentax camera(s), and just keep the Minolta tele-lenses and the best Minolta camera(s),

 

[Pioneer]

I thought I was the only one that used the 28mm f3.5.

http://www.subclub.org/minman/2835.htm

I did not know they made nine versions but as far as I am concerned it is a better lens than my 28/2.8. Speed isn't always the most important thing.

 

[benjiboy]

I amit I have never owned either Minolta or Pentax equipment , but I should think that Pentax would be the easiest to have repaired.

 

[George Mann]

I amit I have never owned either Minolta or Pentax equipment , but I should think that Pentax would be the easiest to have repaired.

And this may be the most important overriding factor.

 

[mshchem]

I didn't say that OP should fondle the gear and reminisce, because that could be exactly the sort of behavior which lead up to the OP's predicament in the first place. One possibility is to pack those boxes in a manner that's ready for shipping, and to do exactly that if the contents aren't sorely missed after say 6 months.

That's actually a pretty good idea. Thankfully I've recycled all my boxes.

 

[xkaes]

I amit I have never owned either Minolta or Pentax equipment , but I should think that Pentax would be the easiest to have repaired.

If you are talking about gear from the last century (1900's) -- which is just about all the gear above -- it's not goiing to make any difference.

 

[Pioneer]

I have been thinking of wrapping and then boxing up some of my cameras and letting them sit in a closet for six months. I am afraid that I would have trouble working the way I do without some of my Pentax equipment, in particular the LX or the K2. I adore some of my Minolta lenses and have a hard time imagining being without them, but I think I could do that easier than doing without the LX. I know it is not the same but I feel about that camera in much the same way that some people on this and other forums feel about their Leica cameras. I know it is not perfect but for how I work most of the time it is pretty darned close.

I am afraid that may end up being the defining factor in this entire decision making process. I know that I can go on a hiking trip, load some Adox CMS 20 film, attach my Limited 31mm lens set at F/8 and focused on infinity, level it on the tripod aimed at a nearby mountain range, press the shutter button, walk away carefully and go to bed. When I get up in the morning the shutter will have closed and I will have a sharp, very well exposed, high resolution negative that I can enlarge and print large enough to rival anything that comes out of my 8x10 camera. I love my large format cameras but I cannot do that with any of them.

Unfortunately repair is getting harder all the time. The electronics in some of these camera, and the LX is one, are breaking down and it is getting difficult to find replacement parts. As odd as it may sound it is easier to fix a completely manual camera like 1936 Leica III than it is to fix an LX built in Y2K. Shutter curtains and springs can be recreated, tiny electronic circuit boards that will fit your cameras are a totally different thing. Even batteries are getting harder to find.

 

[Paul Howell]

Well one way to think about it is shoot with your pentax system, use the LX and lens until the LX dies a natural death doing what it was designed to do.

 

[GregY]

Well one way to think about it is shoot with your pentax system, use the LX and lens until the LX dies a natural death doing what it was designed to do.

Paul that's a really good suggestion. I reflected recently that i should have done that with my Mamiya 6MF.....instead of bailing. At that time even buying a spare body was reasonable.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Totally manual/mechanical is a huge plus as far as I'm concerned. The less electronics the better.

 

[xkaes]

And, don't forget, older cameras can pretty much be found easily at bargain basement prices nowadays, should a replacement be needed -- the K1000 being one of the notable exceptions

 

[Pioneer]

I can't think of a rationale to choose one over the other. So I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that it might be fun to abandon both systems and switch to something else. Perhaps picking up a nice Nikon F3HP and a range of lenses or a Rolleiflex would bring you down some different paths. I bought a screwmount Leica here on the classifieds last May and I've found it an interesting departure from my SLRs.

Mogens does have a point and though I am loathe to get rid of all of my cameras that use electronics a Pentax SV or H1a with a SMC Tak 55/1.8 lens can give pretty awesome results as well. Electronic failure is always a concern. Maybe I just run my LX to failure like Paul Howell suggests and then roll over to a fully mechanical system. My K1000 can use these lenses and though a lot of people think they are over-priced they are very stout cameras and will continue to work for a very long time. Even a 60 year old Minolta SRT will keep working with no battery. Of course running an LX to failure may take a lot longer than one thinks.

 

[Helge]

I thought I was the only one that used the 28mm f3.5. Minolta made NINE versions of the 28mm f3.5 -- and if you can find one, it usually sells for much less than the f2.8 versions.

I have the MC Rokkor-X version which has a 7/7 design and a 55mm filter thread -- but is a little bit smaller and lighter than the f2.8 version. Great for a small, light camera, like an XG.

http://www.subclub.org/minman/2835.htm

In my perspective, the f3.5 performs adequately, reaching 'quite good' status, but it only truly shines when stopped down to f8 for very good results. However, this requirement makes handheld shooting challenging except in ideal (boring?) lighting conditions, potentially limiting depth of field effect in close up shots.
The lens would be a true gem if its wide-open performance was better.

The 35mm f2.8 lens is a true hidden gem, delivering superb results even at f2.8.

For unmatched 28mm performance in the Minolta realm, the 2.0 is the undisputed choice.

The MD lens lineup, encompassing the 16mm fish-eye, 20mm 2.8, 24mm 2.8, 28mm 2.0, 35mm 2.8 VFD, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 2.0, 135mm 2.8 (or 2.0 for rich or fortunate ones), 200mm 2.8, and the accompanying 300-S 2x tele extender, represents the finest array of lenses for a 135 SLR in my experience. Having explored glass from various lineups such as Canon, Nikon, Olympus, and Pentax, this Minolta lineup stands out distinctly.

 

[xkaes]

In my perspective, the f3.5 performs adequately, reaching 'quite good' status, but it only truly shines when stopped down to f8 for very good results.

Since Minolta made NINE versions of the 28mm f3.5, I'd say you are painting with a very wide brush. I only use my 28mm f2.0 when I need the extra "speed", because the f3.5 is half the size and half the weight.

 

[Helge]

Since Minolta made NINE versions of the 28mm f3.5, I'd say you are painting with a very wide brush. I only use my 28mm f2.0 when I need the extra "speed", because the f3.5 is half the size and half the weight.

I've only experienced the 5/5 version, which is the same formula across all MD versions.
The 7/7 version, while not subpar, doesn't seem worth actively seeking out based on reviews. When shooting with a wide angle, having a large maximum aperture is important for achieving precise focus at close distances.

 

[dynachrome]

It seems like space is more of a motivating factor in getting rid of done stuff than anything else. Even though I started taking pictures more than fifty years ago, I am still in the accumulation phase. There are many Pentax and Minolta cameras and lenses in my collection. There are many other brands too. At thus stage, I am not interested in certain cameras even though it would be interesting to have some experience with them. The list includes cameras like the Minolta XK and XK Motor, the Canon T90, the Contax RTSIII, the Pentax LX, the Nikon F100 and the Topcon Super DM. Any one of these could become expensive paperweights in an instant. They are difficult or impossible to have repaired. A Canon FTb or a Minolta SRT, or a Nikkormat can usually be repaired. Even though I enjoy using cameras like the Nikon N90S or Canon AE-1 Program or Konica FT-1, I like having mechanical cameras in the same mounts so I always have something to put my lenses on.

You seem to be more connected to the Pentax cameras. If you decide to keep those, try keeping one Minolta camera and a small set of lenses for it. You might sometimes enjoy using them too. Even though my experiences started in 1971, I have in my collection some of the cameras that picture takers older than me started with. These include the Canonflex RM, some F mount Konica SLRs, a Nikkorex F with the 50/2 Tick Mark Nikkor-S, a Minolta SR-7, Pentax H1a and S1a cameras and the Topcon RE Super with the 5.8 cm f/1.4.

 

[mshchem]

I have been thinking of wrapping and then boxing up some of my cameras and letting them sit in a closet for six months. I am afraid that I would have trouble working the way I do without some of my Pentax equipment, in particular the LX or the K2. I adore some of my Minolta lenses and have a hard time imagining being without them, but I think I could do that easier than doing without the LX. I know it is not the same but I feel about that camera in much the same way that some people on this and other forums feel about their Leica cameras. I know it is not perfect but for how I work most of the time it is pretty darned close.

I am afraid that may end up being the defining factor in this entire decision making process. I know that I can go on a hiking trip, load some Adox CMS 20 film, attach my Limited 31mm lens set at F/8 and focused on infinity, level it on the tripod aimed at a nearby mountain range, press the shutter button, walk away carefully and go to bed. When I get up in the morning the shutter will have closed and I will have a sharp, very well exposed, high resolution negative that I can enlarge and print large enough to rival anything that comes out of my 8x10 camera. I love my large format cameras but I cannot do that with any of them.

Unfortunately repair is getting harder all the time. The electronics in some of these camera, and the LX is one, are breaking down and it is getting difficult to find replacement parts. As odd as it may sound it is easier to fix a completely manual camera like 1936 Leica III than it is to fix an LX built in Y2K. Shutter curtains and springs can be recreated, tiny electronic circuit boards that will fit your cameras are a totally different thing. Even batteries are getting harder to find.

LX is a keeper no doubt and that 31mm is very neat. I have 5 rolls of the film you mentioned and the special developer, hopefully, next up in lineup.

 

[MattKing]

Even though I started taking pictures more than fifty years ago, I am still in the accumulation phase.

Psst - in case you don't realize this, after 50+ years I don't think it is a "phase"

 

[Pioneer]

Psst - in case you don't realize this, after 50+ years I don't think it is a "phase"

Yes. My wife very firmly notified me that mine own collection tendencies had passed from "phase" to "obsession" about the time the 4th SRT-101 entered the house.

"But dear...if one breaks I'll have a spare..."