I prefer the KX to the Minolta SR-t series. But of course I would take any SR-t over the K1000.
Minolta SRT102/SRT Super - First camera to display shutter speed & aperture in viewfinder?
-
A
- Thread starter skorpiius
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale NIKON D800 (read)
- Started by Acere
-
Want to Buy WTB Konica Hexar RF
- Started by axestrata
-
For Sale Multiple Signed Photographic Books
- Started by tallenpatterson
-
Want to Buy Color by Beseler Print Processing Drums
- Started by logan2z
Forum statistics
I prefer the KX to the Minolta SR-t series. But of course I would take any SR-t over the K1000.
I have an SRT101 and they are fun cameras.
There may have been pro cameras that displayed shooting info in the viewfinder earlier, but the comparison is like apples and oranges...
A Nikon F2 photomic sold new for about $650 in the early 70s, while the SRT101 cost about $180 new.
As far as consumer cameras go I still believe this little Minolta was in the lead (but I just saw in another reply that Konica may have done it earlier).
I know that once one manufacturer came out with something awesome, the others rushed to copy it.
There may have been pro cameras that displayed shooting info in the viewfinder earlier, but the comparison is like apples and oranges...
A Nikon F2 photomic sold new for about $650 in the early 70s, while the SRT101 cost about $180 new.
As far as consumer cameras go I still believe this little Minolta was in the lead (but I just saw in another reply that Konica may have done it earlier).
I know that once one manufacturer came out with something awesome, the others rushed to copy it.
Butkus does have a manual for both - T1 and T2. T1 doesn't appear to have full readout (it only seems to have the aperture scale), while T2 already has aperture + shutter indicator.
I have T, T2, which is not labeled as T2, T3 and T4, the T, T2. T3 show the aperture scale on the right, on the bottom is the shutter speed readout. The T4 does not have a shutter speed readout. Not sure about the later electronic versions or the TC. The A, A3 do not have a shutter speed readout.
I have T, T2, which is not labeled as T2, T3 and T4, the T, T2. T3 show the aperture scale on the right, on the bottom is the shutter speed readout. The T4 does not have a shutter speed readout. Not sure about the later electronic versions or the TC. The A, A3 do not have a shutter speed readout.
The Minolta SRT200 models (there were EIGHT of them -- http://www.subclub.org/minman/srt200.htm) were almost exactly the same as the Pentax K1000 -- size, weight, features, etc.
The main difference is that you can find a Minolta SRT200 model for about 1/10th the price of the K1000.
The main thing about the SR-t is that their meter isn't accurate. Even when I used the correct battery it still has problem because the response isn't linear. Oh yeah the K1000 is selling used for more than the KX. That's the reason I hate the K1000. I do have a few of them for free but I would never use them. Being the same as the K1000 isn't something good. It's the cheapest SLR Pentax made.
And you know this how? Never noticed anything off with any of mine.
As long as the cement holding the cells to the prism has not yellowed or has been properly cleaned off and replaced, it’s as good as any CdS meter.
The LX is very small even by small camera standards . . .
Size Lineup by Les DMess, on FlickrCompared to it's peers - interchangeable viewfinder types . . .
MInolta XK, Canon New F-1, Nikon F3 & Pentax LX by Les DMess, on FlickrAnd it has more viewfinders with the largest and smallest magnification . . .
LX Viewfinders by Les DMess, on FlickrBy testing several of them with correct battery voltage. And yes I used Minolta meters to check.
The K1000 might have been the least expensive SLR that Pentax ever made -- adjusting for inflation (we'll forget about the Pentax 110 SLR for now) -- but it's certainly not the least expensive 35mm SLR to buy today. That's what really matters.
I agree. I've never had any problems with my SRT meters. Some people don't use them correctly because of the CLC bottom-weighted system, but I think they are more accurate for most people and subjects when compared to a center-weighted method.
The LX is very small even by small camera standards . . .
Compared to it's peers - interchangeable viewfinder types . . .
And it has more viewfinders with the largest and smallest magnification . . .
Les, thanks for setting the record straight on the relative sizes of high end 35mm system cameras.
I use Minolta meters too -- usually in incident mode. But with my SRT meters, I only needed to use my Minolta Autometer II in difficult situations. Some of my best exposures were with the SRT meters and Kodachrome 25. If your meter isn't dead-on accurate, Kodachrome 25 will let you know!
Last edited:
The K1000 is way overpriced today.
Did you test incident with a diffuser or on a blank wall? Remember CLC.
Same could be said for Mju II or F3 or most medium format gear.
The meter in the camera is reflected so the meter I use to compare with is also reflected. I used a dichroic enlarger so that I can dial in the intensity of the light which is a 6" circle. I checked the eveness of the surface and it's better than 0.1 stop using the Minolta spot meter. The camera would be put close to it and have that surface cover the entire frame. The light intensity is changed from EV9 to EV15 to check meter response when in a dark place as well as bright place. It's over expose in the bright and under in the dark. So you can't even compensate for it by using a different ASA than your film.
If I were to use an incident meter then the lighted surface must be 18% gray and also since it a flat surface the flat diffuser must be used. Also it's difficult to light a surface evenly when the camera is blocking the light.
CdS cells has a different spectral response. Warmer light might account for the difference.
Not a big deal at the time of Sr-t introduction, due to the slowness of film making it outdoors strictly and flash indoors, or tungsten rated and sensitized film.
Last edited:
Meter is supposed to have a spectral response of about 4700K. I use a color meter and dial in the dichroic filter to get it about that.
OP
OP
Olympus 35RC is a good (and rather tiny) example of that. However, the best definition of its release year I have is "1970-something"Some sources claim that it's from 1970 specifically, but I'm not sure.
Very cool, I had no idea such a thing existed
OP
OP
The LX is very small even by small camera standards . . .
Compared to it's peers - interchangeable viewfinder types . . .
And it has more viewfinders with the largest and smallest magnification . . .
I love these comparison posts, super helpful.
This example only has the shutter speed in the display, and an indication of under or over exposure, but no indication of lens aperture set on the lens
The Canon E F that came out also in 1973 had both the shutter speed in use and the lens aperture set in the viewfinder.
Last edited:
Yes I have 2 EF's but it only display automatically set aperture or recommended aperture. Not manually set aperture.
The 35RC (1970) -- and it's better brother, the 35RD (1975) -- show the set shutter speed and the automatically-set f-stop in the viewfinder. There were MANY similar cameras in that era -- most available very inexpensively:
http://www.subclub.org/minman/leanmean.pdf
I enjoy taking pics of them as well as with them!
Regarding the original topic, I suppose that leaves out all M42 as well as Olympus OM cameras.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |