Pentax K1000

[Roger Cole]

I wouldn't call it the worst, but I do agree it's vastly over-rated. I have one, and also an MX. The MX used to be actually less expensive. That's no longer true but they're pretty close at KEH in EX condition and the MX is a far superior camera.

 

[pbromaghin]

What part of $100 for a solid body and tack-sharp 50mm lens is expensive?

 

[MattKing]

I would be willing to bet that parts for the K1000 will remain available as long as for any camera around.

 

[mehguy]

I think the OP must have gotten one of the later plastic bodied K-1000 models. The **real** (metal body) "Asahi Pentax" K-1000 was a fantastic student camera....still is.

huh, are the plastic ones considered really low quality?

 

[GRHazelton]

I would be willing to bet that parts for the K1000 will remain available as long as for any camera around.

If parts for the K1000 remain available they will be from junked examples. Pentax no longer supports the LX or the MX, etc. I have a K 1000, also MX, ME Super, LX, KX... To me the KX is pretty much what the K 1000 should have been, offering settings visible in the viewfinder, DOF preview, a way to turn off the meter other than using the lens cap. A much more capable camera. And, if you can find one (a big if) often cheaper today than the K 1000, due to inflated demand for the K 1000.

 

[BradS]

huh, are the plastic ones considered really low quality?

no...not really. They're just not as highly regarded as the earlier "all metal" bodies. The user experience is (subtly ?) different between the two. Anyway, the glass is what matters...with Pentax, it is always about the optics....the body really only serves to keep the dark from escaping .

To me, if the body is reliable and has all of the features I need / want (and not too many that I do not want / need) then it is good. The K-1000 met those criteria for me for a very long time....and for many, many hundreds of rolls of film.

 

[Les Sarile]

How does the K1000 cpmpare to the Nikon FM?:confused:

Nikon's smaller body answer to the the OM1, the FM was released the same year as the last Nikkormat FT3. Compared to the K1000, the FM had motor option, higher sync speed, LED meter GPD cel, self timer with mirror lockup, DOF preview and shutter speed and aperture in viewfinder. The K1000 has a shutter cocked indicator. While the K1000's center the needle meter is always on and requires a lens cover to turn off while the FM requires the film advance lever to be sticking out to activate the meter and to fire the shutter. Apparently this setup pokes some folks in the eye.

 

[Brett Rogers]

Yep. I use the M6, which has less features than the K1000 as it is a rangefinder and cannot show depth of field at all and doesn't correct for parallax perfectly at all distances.

But a K1000 cannot show depth of field at all, either—something one accepts in a rangefinder, but which is completely at odds with an SLR so frequently touted as ideal for student photographers. You may or may not have a need to use a DOF preview for your imaging, but you should know how to use it. It's an overrated and over priced camera given prices currently paid.

 

[Les Sarile]

But a K1000 cannot show depth of field at all, either—something one accepts in a rangefinder, but which is completely at odds with an SLR so frequently touted as ideal for student photographers. You may or may not have a need to use a DOF preview for your imaging, but you should know how to use it. It's an overrated and over priced camera given prices currently paid.

You only have to set the aperture then unlock and partially turn the lens loose and it will stop down to give you a preview.

For the Leica rangefinders, I understand there is a Visoflex adapter that gives it SLR perspective so not impossible for Leica either.

 

[Brett Rogers]

You only have to set the aperture then unlock and partially turn the lens loose and it will stop down to give you a preview.

Oh bugger that. I could rip the film out and put a ground glass over the film rails too for that matter. But I'd never bother, when better cameras that actually have a DOF preview are available for less money.

For the Leica rangefinders, I understand there is a Visoflex adapter that gives it SLR perspective so not impossible for Leica either.

You could also get reflex housings for Voigtländer and Contax RF too. Meaning they were essentially, no longer rangefinders with these accessories fitted. Or hybrids, if you prefer to look at it that way.

I did own a K1000 for a few months and ran a roll through it. I subsequently gave it away. The single most boring and uninspiring camera it's ever been my misfortune to use.

 

[Les Sarile]

Oh bugger that. I could rip the film out and put a ground glass over the film rails too for that matter. But I'd never bother, when better cameras that actually have a DOF preview are available for less money.
You could also get reflex housings for Voigtländer and Contax RF too. Meaning they were essentially, no longer rangefinders with these accessories fitted. Or hybrids, if you prefer to look at it that way.

Some would call that flexible/adaptable. Like the interchangeable viewfinders and focus mirror types. Bolt on 250 or more film backs, etc.

I did own a K1000 for a few months and ran a roll through it. I subsequently gave it away. The single most boring and uninspiring camera it's ever been my misfortune to use.

Does that make it the worst Pentax manual camera then?

It is a great thing we have options!

 

[Les Sarile]

Maybe you're right. There are probably alot of good old full-manual cameras out there - and it's great to work with them. Nothing really distracts from concentrating on doing photography. That might be a (technical/psychological) reason why so many people get back to cameras like a K1000, and are surprised why they take/give better photographies with them, out of nostalgic reasons, too, i guess. Alot has to do with getting used to a certain kind of camera, habituation ( a very strong force!). A few month ago I was struggling with my Pentax MX, not only because I'm more or less a beginner (learning the very basics of the craft), but also for bodily reasons: where a the knobs, how to turn/push them, etc.
Anyway. There's an entertaining and worth reading little article on the K1000. Just replace 'K1000' with any other name of a similar camera:

http://www.theothermartintaylor.com/moveabletype/archives/cameras/000217.html

Greetings,
Brian (who's sadly missing his MX right now)

Very well written article and I concur with the Zippo lighter comparison.

 

[Roger Cole]

Nikon's smaller body answer to the the OM1, the FM was released the same year as the last Nikkormat FT3. Compared to the K1000, the FM had motor option, higher sync speed, LED meter GPD cel, self timer with mirror lockup, DOF preview and shutter speed and aperture in viewfinder. The K1000 has a shutter cocked indicator. While the K1000's center the needle meter is always on and requires a lens cover to turn off while the FM requires the film advance lever to be sticking out to activate the meter and to fire the shutter. Apparently this setup pokes some folks in the eye.

The Pentax to compare most closely to the FM would be the MX (yes or KX) not K1000. Love my MX, my K1000 even before the Goan failed was "meh."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

 

[Xmas]

Supply and demand controls market price.

There were a lot of k1000 made so they should be really cheap unless a large % were in land fill like Ming vases, or they did not work reliably.

Like an OM1 they do have a following if you want to take photos and need a cheap reliable camera.

They will meter accurately on any battery type.

Siren songs like don't have a depth of field stop down are curious. Modern cameras don't have depth of field markings on lenses. And how much you can use depth of field on screen way debatable.

If you need a depth of field stop down a training course won't make you a better photographer?

Nikons like the FM and follow on models needed stop down for legacy lenses.

They are actually cheap in UK, some other lower volume K mount cameras are cheaper still, but that tells you something else? And I've not noticed the Ch models cheaper, neither of mine are Ja made.

 

[Brett Rogers]

Some would call that flexible/adaptable. Like the interchangeable viewfinders and focus mirror types. Bolt on 250 or more film backs, etc.



Does that make it the worst Pentax manual camera then?

It is a great thing we have options!

Probably not, no. But the most overrated? Definitely.

 

[Paul Howell]

What part of $100 for a solid body and tack-sharp 50mm lens is expensive?

How about a P3 with the same lens for $20-$30?

 

[Chan Tran]

Some would call that flexible/adaptable. Like the interchangeable viewfinders and focus mirror types. Bolt on 250 or more film backs, etc.



Does that make it the worst Pentax manual camera then?

It is a great thing we have options!

If you say the K1000 isn't the worst Pentax manual camera then you have to name at least 1 Pentax that is worse than the K1000.

 

[LarryP]

I find this thread a bit funny. The K1000 is what it is a basic entry level body - solid,reliable no frills. Is it overpriced compared to other Pentax bodies - probably or other bodies are underpriced. I use a film km as i like the option of using the self timer as a redneck mirror lockup. I find the viewfinder display in the k2 cluttered and distracting, the meter switch on spottys are an irritant for me the mx and lx too small. Does this mean they are inferior? No, just not the best fit for my preferences. For those that don't like the lack of viewfinder DOF in the K1000 how often do you use that instead of the Dof lens markings or DOF charts?

 

[frank]

First world problems!

 

[Chrismat]

If you use Takumar M42 lenses on the K1000 with an M42 adapter, depth of field preview is available using the manual/auto switch on the lens. Other than that, I've always used the depth of field scale on the bayonet lenses.

 

[Roger Cole]

For those that don't like the lack of viewfinder DOF in the K1000 how often do you use that instead of the Dof lens markings or DOF charts?

Pretty frequently actually, YMMV.

The fact I have one of the late, "plasticy" feeling ones may affect my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

 

[Les Sarile]

If you say the K1000 isn't the worst Pentax manual camera then you have to name at least 1 Pentax that is worse than the K1000.

Since I haven't tried all the manual focus Pentax bodies, I wouldn't really know. Have you tried all of them yourself?

 

[LarryP]

Pretty frequently actually, YMMV.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

The fact I have one of the late, "plasticy" feeling ones may affect my opinion. That or the fact you are comfortable with the MX. M series bodies always felt a little short in my hands, but that's just me. I'll admit there are times they felt better in my hands because I do find the viewfinder and metering a step or 2 up in the MX.

 

[Chan Tran]

Since I haven't tried all the manual focus Pentax bodies, I wouldn't really know. Have you tried all of them yourself?

I have the old S3, I have the MX and I have the KX and all those are significantly better than the K1000 even though the S3 doesn't have a meter. I don't know about a mechanical Pentax SLR made later than the MX as the LX is hybrid. I didn't own but have used the spotmatic F and the KM and they are also better than the K1000. I think the K1000 is the worst mechanical Pentax SLR and I can be wrong but if someone think I am wrong then which one of the Pentaxes is worse than the K1000.

 

[frank]

Pentax models that came after MX/MEsuper left me cold, but so did plastic fantastic models of other brands in that era.