Minolta XK AE vs AE-S heads - my take.

[Huss]

I use my Minolta XK with both the AE and AE-S heads. The AE one is the original CDS celled metered head that makes the camera look like Herman Munster. So ugly I love it, and so unique too.
The AE-S head was the 'improved' design using SPD cells. Physically it is less imposing, and thus IMO lost some of the original character. But the SPD cells allow it to react to light quicker thus making it "better". It is also about a stop more sensitive. The AE-S head is much harder and more expensive to find.
So why do I prefer the old style Herman head? Several reasons:

1/ You see the entire shutter speed scale at the same time. Sounds simple enough, no? But the AE-S head shows about half of them at any time, you need to flip a switch between them.
2/ The AE head's shutter speed scale is very legible and very easy to read in most lighting conditions. The AE-S head's LEDs are invisible in bright light, and blind out the read out in dim light.
3/ Switching to manual exposure mode, the AE head uses simple and very effective match needle metering. The AE-S head shows a mechanical actual shutter speed read out in a tiny window in the top right corner of the vf, which you then need to match with the lit LED in the main read out.
4/ The AE head has an Auto Exposure Overide Control switch which allows you to seamlessly dial in exposure compensation while looking through the VF. Once you let go of it, it reverts back to the standard exposure. The AE-S head replaces that with an exposure compensation dial. Problem is there is no indication of it in the VF, so if you forget to change it back...

And now the advantages of the AE-S head:

1/ Film speed setting is harder to accidentally change.
2/ 3 position meter on switch - off, always on w/ no LEDs in VF (saves battery life), always on. The AE head has ON or OFF. Both use the sensor switch on the front of the camera.

For me, the advantages of the old AE head by far outway those of the AE-S head.

AE-S head

AE head

Multiple exposure shot with AE head:

 

[Barry S]

Interesting take. I bought the XK with AE head when it was introduced, and never really knew much about the AE-S head. I was used to the "monster" head, because it replaced a Nikon F with the equally (if not more) bulky Photomic FTn head. The XK was a joy to use--not withstanding the size and weight. Loved the implementation of the exposure compensation--simple and intuitive. Only rarely did the ISO dial get inadvertently changed--the detents were fairly stiff.

 

[Les Sarile]

I agree with the synopsis. Also, the original AE viewfinder features the Minolta CLC (Contrast Light Compensator) system that was not carried over to the AE-S VF.

Beautiful XM and XK you have there and that multi expose shot is surreal looking.

 

[Huss]

Thanks. I only have the XK now. The XM while outwardly was perfect, must have been put away wet and unused for years as it was seriously flaky w the electrics. My repair dood couldn't even open the body to check, the screws had seized. They tried all sorts of break free snake oils etc. But, the AE-S head on it was perfectly fine, which is why I have the AE and AE-S head with one XK body.

 

[Les Sarile]

I managed to score the AE-S, High Magnification finder (H Finder) and the Waist Level finder (W Finder) for my XK as well.

 

[Huss]

I managed to score the AE-S, High Magnification finder (H Finder) and the Waist Level finder (W Finder) for my XK as well.

Gimme that lens! Very nice kit. Now gimme that lens!

 

[Huss]

I was working in a camera store when the Minolta XK hit the photo magazines back then. A fellow salesman remarked to me how much he wanted one. I thought he was daffy. 45 years later I bought a used Konica Minolta Bizhub C500 to help my printing business. That didn't work out well at all. Minolta was behind the time then, and now. What a piece of junk. The copier, I mean. Constant source of maintenance problems and heartbreak. Good luck with that XK.

Umm. Ok. Sorry you had problems with a Bizhub, whatever that is..
My XK works awesome, 45 years after it was made. As for behind the times, Minolta beat Nikon in introducing a pro camera with auto exposure by eight years.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Yes the XK beat the F3 to market BUT the F3 really benefited from the very fast development in IC chips and flexible printed circuit ribbons which IMO made a better more durable and reliable camera.

 

[Huss]

Yes the XK beat the F3 to market BUT the F3 really benefited from the very fast development in IC chips and flexible printed circuit ribbons which IMO made a better more durable and reliable camera.

I'm definitely not claiming the XK is better than an F3! I had one of those, sweet machine and a lovely handler. But the XK offered an option at a time that Nikon w the F2 did not have.

 

[Barry S]

I was working in a camera store when the Minolta XK hit the photo magazines back then. A fellow salesman remarked to me how much he wanted one. I thought he was daffy. 45 years later I bought a used Konica Minolta Bizhub C500 to help my printing business. That didn't work out well at all. Minolta was behind the time then, and now. What a piece of junk. The copier, I mean. Constant source of maintenance problems and heartbreak. Good luck with that XK.

Like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. Give me five bees for a quarter, you'd say.

Now where were we? Oh yeah: the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn't have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...

 

[Theo Sulphate]

The AE head was so distinctive when the XK was introduced - it reminded me of the distinctive Nikon FTN heads - the system would've attracted more pro attention and been more successful if the body had allowed an optional motor drive.

Minolta is like the best actor to never have won an Oscar.

 

[Paul Howell]

The AE head was so distinctive when the XK was introduced - it reminded me of the distinctive Nikon FTN heads - the system would've attracted more pro attention and been more successful if the body had allowed an optional motor drive.

Minolta is like the best actor to never have won an Oscar.

Somewhat odd that Minolta only offered an integrated motor drive on the XK, then an optional motor drive and winder on the Max 9000 just as everyone else integrated the motor drive in body.

 

[Huss]

Like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. Give me five bees for a quarter, you'd say.

Now where were we? Oh yeah: the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn't have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...

Damn dood that was funny! Thanks for the laugh!

 

[Barry S]

Somewhat odd that Minolta only offered an integrated motor drive on the XK, then an optional motor drive and winder on the Max 9000 just as everyone else integrated the motor drive in body.

Minolta badly miscalculated by not offering an optional motor drive or the integrated version at the same time. The motor drive version came out several years after the original XK, and by then it was too late. The lack of any motor drive for what was intended as a professional camera doomed the XK. Also, Minolta never had the resources and expertise to compete with Nikon Professional Services. Like sending a rabbit against a bear--the rabbit may be fast, but the bear is eventually going to eat it for lunch.

 

[Malinku]

I thought this was about two different xk finders not.............whatever

Anyways I like my xk and AE finder. I find it to be a top quality combo and it is my go to for event shooting. Mainly Due to the 35mm f1..

 

[blockend]

For those of us of a certain vintage, interchangeable head cameras are synonymous with the term professional. However 40+ years on they are an anachronism with appeal to collectors and camera sniffers only. That isn't to say they're bad cameras, or lacking in a certain industrial charm, but as users give me an integrated head SLR every time. Replacing an elegant prism with a house brick because a few users needed microscopy or astronomy attachments, has little appeal to a modern user.

 

[Huss]

Replacing an elegant prism with a house brick because a few users needed microscopy or astronomy attachments, has little appeal to a modern user.

Au contraire, modern users, those discovering film for the first time, are drawn by the house brick charm of these vintage cameras. Unlike the modern soap bar shape of DSLRs.
It's almost like playing with a big lego camera! Snap this part off, snap this part on. Make it what you want it to be.
There's a reason that many digital cameras have an articulated rear LCD panel. It's the same reason that these old house brick cameras offer interchangeable heads - in this case the equivalent would be the waist level finder.

 

[blockend]

Au contraire, modern users, those discovering film for the first time, are drawn by the house brick charm of these vintage cameras.

The point is it's a helluva lot of real estate to provide a meter inside a removable head. Compare the plain prism Nikon F or F2 - a nice little pyramid - to the F Photomic and there's no aesthetic comparison. In camera metering of non-pro cameras was always more nicely executed than the interchangeable variety. The charm of those cameras isn't lost on me (I've owned a few) but when it comes to choosing a camera to take out, the brick heads always stayed on the shelf.

 

[Les Sarile]

Minolta badly miscalculated by not offering an optional motor drive or the integrated version at the same time. The motor drive version came out several years after the original XK, and by then it was too late.

Interestingly it was reported that Minolta didn't provide a motor as the CDS meter cels used were not fast enough to keep up with a motor. This would make sense since they developed the AE-S using SPD for release with the motorized XM five years later.

 

[Barry S]

Interestingly it was reported that Minolta didn't provide a motor as the CDS meter cels used were not fast enough to keep up with a motor. This would make sense since they developed the AE-S using SPD for release with the motorized XM five years later.

Wow--never head that one, but it sounds completely misguided. The Nikon F had a motor drive and many of those cameras had plain prisms. The response of the Photomic finders was not fast at all. The F2 didn't have fast finders until several years after introduction. I think the motor was a separate issue, since pro photographers--if they were metering at all, metered and fired off a sequence of shots.

 

[Les Sarile]

Wow--never head that one, .... The Nikon F had a motor drive and may of those cameras had plain prisms.

Given that this was some decades ago now, it may not be common knowledge today. The XK had aperture priority and would be affected but of course the plain (pretty but non-metered) finders would not.

 

[Barry S]

Not sure I'm following you. Minolta could have told pros--the AP metering may not keep up in changing lighting conditions--and it wouldn't have mattered to those guys. The motor drive by itself had become an essential piece of gear for many pros and very few would have even used AP mode.

 

[Les Sarile]

Not sure I'm following you.

Obviously there is nothing to follow now but just something to use and enjoy . . . or not.

 

[Les Sarile]

Replacing an elegant prism with a house brick because a few users needed microscopy or astronomy attachments, has little appeal to a modern user.

There seems to be a general tendency to homogenize the product especially once a "successful formula" is discovered. I for one appreciate the many ways I can appreciate taking a photo. One thing these do seem to have in common, they are all good light tight boxes . . .

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Given the creativity and variety of cameras in the 1960's and 1970's, I wonder which has the most outrageous-appearing meter head for a 35mm SLR...