Pentax ME Super

[xkaes]

Because the KM and KX and MX exist and can be had for the same price, or less.

You got that right. The K1000 is a nice camera, but it has developed a REP -- a following -- and sells for much more than it should. The same thing has happened to other cameras as well. The Minolta SRT101 is in the same boat. It too is a nice camera, but it sells for much more than the more capable SRT102, SRT 201, or SRT202. Makes no sense to me.

 

[Chrismat]

The Spotmatic has a self-timer and depth of field preview lever, which the K1000 lacks.

The Spomatic can be turned off at will, something that is not possible on the K1000 unless one puts the whole camera in a bag or somewhere dark.

The Spotmatic is a better built camera.

Using a K1000 with an M42 lens with the adapter, depth of field can checked by closing down the lens. I've had batteries in the camera lasting well over a year just by making sure a lens cap is on it. I do miss not having a self timer, but what I like about the K1000 is that it feels good in the hand because it's uncluttered. I agree that the prices for the camera are nuts.

 

[xkaes]

The K1000 is a stripped down KM -- which is a stripped down KX -- both which have the same body, but more features, and often for less $$$. The K2 adds aperture priority -- again to the same body. What's not to love?

In this case, LESS is NOT MORE.

 

[Helge]

I would suggest you to stay with the ME. The ME is better built than the ME super; it has an actual metal top plate (plastic on the ME super) and overall it feels nicer finished. It also has a more beautiful, clean top plate.

The 1/2000 speed... you don't really need it. And even then, the ME super's 1/2000 speed is probably about 1/1500 in real life.

The manual mode... you don't need it either, it's a bit cumbersome, plus the auto mode works wonderfully. The ME was really perfectly designed.

For me the best improvement on the ME Super is that it is quieter.

The mirror (and shutter?) is much better dampened in the Super. That alone is reason to change.
I haven’t found a good Super yet. What I do have is a ME F which is a rather fun camera to use.

The 50mm 1.7 is IMO superior in every other way than that half stop, to 1.4.
Probably the worst 1.4 50 from a reputable manufacturer. Not bad but not great.
The 1.7 is superb.

 

[flavio81]

The K1000 is a stripped down KM -- which is a stripped down KX -- both which have the same body, but more features, and often for less $$$. The K2 adds aperture priority -- again to the same body. What's not to love?

In this case, LESS is NOT MORE.

This is not correct. The K2 is an entirely diferent body. It does not have interchangeable parts with the other machines. It uses a vertical shutter, not a horizontal shutter, for example.

 

[flavio81]

The 50mm 1.7 is IMO superior in every other way than that half stop, to 1.4.
Probably the worst 1.4 50 from a reputable manufacturer. Not bad but not great.
The 1.7 is superb.

Which problem did you have with the 50/1.4?

I have the Pentax-A 50/1.4 and it's one of the best 50mm's i've ever owned -- and this means a very long list of fast 50 lenses from many manufacturers -- including Nikkor-S 50/1.4, SC 50/1.4, FD 50/1.4, FDn 50/1.4, FDn 50/1.2, FD 55/1.2, FL 55/1.2, SMCT 50/1.4... list is even longer if I add slower lenses.

I've seen controlled tests and the performance of the Pentax-A 50/1.4, 1.7 and 2.0 lenses is very similar, surprisingly similar.

No contest on the 50/1.7 being superb, because it is.

 

[M-88]

This is not correct. The K2 is an entirely diferent body. It does not have interchangeable parts with the other machines. It uses a vertical shutter, not a horizontal shutter, for example.

I believe xkaes was talking about same "form factor", not the same body. Otherwise saying that K2 and K1000 have the same body is like saying ME and MX have the same body. They are similarly sized, but with different innards.

 

[Helge]

Which problem did you have with the 50/1.4?

I have the Pentax-A 50/1.4 and it's one of the best 50mm's i've ever owned -- and this means a very long list of fast 50 lenses from many manufacturers -- including Nikkor-S 50/1.4, SC 50/1.4, FD 50/1.4, FDn 50/1.4, FDn 50/1.2, FD 55/1.2, FL 55/1.2, SMCT 50/1.4... list is even longer if I add slower lenses.

I've seen controlled tests and the performance of the Pentax-A 50/1.4, 1.7 and 2.0 lenses is very similar, surprisingly similar.

No contest on the 50/1.7 being superb, because it is.

You know the A version may well be different. I actually have one with a small front element coating error. That and the size compared to the M version is the reason I haven’t used it.

Compared to Minolta and Nikons 1.4 50mm offerings the SMC M 50 1.4 is just noticeably softer at larger apertures and doesn’t get better as fast as the 1.7 when stopped down.

 

[runswithsizzers]

[...]
The 50mm 1.7 is IMO superior in every other way than that half stop, to 1.4.
Probably the worst 1.4 50 from a reputable manufacturer. Not bad but not great.
The 1.7 is superb.

I just don't see that in my photos taken with the M-series versions of those two Pentax 50mm lenses. I have not done any critical side-by-side comparisons between my f/1.7 and my f/1.4, but looking at approximately 200 images taken with those lenses, I cannot see any difference in image quality. I almost never use apertures below f/5.6, so maybe there is more of a difference at wider apertures(?), but at f/8-11, my Pentax 50mm f/1.4 performs very similar to my 50mm f/1.7.

 

[flavio81]

You know the A version may well be different. I actually have one with a small front element coating error. That and the size compared to the M version is the reason I haven’t used it.

Compared to Minolta and Nikons 1.4 50mm offerings the SMC M 50 1.4 is just noticeably softer at larger apertures and doesn’t get better as fast as the 1.7 when stopped down.

Dear GT,

Keep in mind that the Pentax-M and Pentax-A 50/1.4 lenses do, very frequently, suffer from haze at the last cemented group. I own two of such (hazy) samples, and have seen many more, either here or on eBay.

This, as you know, will negatively affect performance. It will give lower contrast, which also gives low resolution (particularly with film), and yes, you will have to stop the lens a lot to get any improvement.

I've held on to my 50/1.4 Pentax-A lens for years. I've sold many lenses during the last 5 years including many other 50mm lenses, but I don't plan to sell my Pentax-A 50/1.4 any time soon. It's really good.

 

[Helge]

Dear GT,

Keep in mind that the Pentax-M and Pentax-A 50/1.4 lenses do, very frequently, suffer from haze at the last cemented group. I own two of such (hazy) samples, and have seen many more, either here or on eBay.

This, as you know, will negatively affect performance. It will give lower contrast, which also gives low resolution (particularly with film), and yes, you will have to stop the lens a lot to get any improvement.

I've held on to my 50/1.4 Pentax-A lens for years. I've sold many lenses during the last 5 years including many other 50mm lenses, but I don't plan to sell my Pentax-A 50/1.4 any time soon. It's really good.

I’m pretty sure that isn’t the case with my copy. Been shining a torch through all my lenses semi obsessively.

 

[CMoore]

I never knew much about Pentax.
But i do remember the television commercials for the ME Super.
It seemed to be a pretty popular 35mm in its time.

Seems like the Canon AE-1P and the Pentax ME Super had a rather big advertising budget for television,
I suppose they were a big seller for their respective companies.
The Good Old Days..............

 

[maltfalc]

I have a small camera collection that was started with cameras my Father saved for me over the years. Since then family friends, childhood friends, and camera club members donate cameras. I just received two Pentax Cameras, a ME and a K-1000. I was not impressed with the K-1000 but love the size and weight of the ME. I am waiting on batteries but am already considering a ME Super for Manual mode and higher shutter speeds. I also am thinking of replacing the 50mm F1.7 with maybe the f1.4 b just feels a little to short for comfort. Looking for tips on anything to pay particular attention too and opinions of any kind.

i'd skip the me super and get a super program.

 

[maltfalc]

I would suggest you to stay with the ME. The ME is better built than the ME super; it has an actual metal top plate (plastic on the ME super) and overall it feels nicer finished. It also has a more beautiful, clean top plate.

The 1/2000 speed... you don't really need it. And even then, the ME super's 1/2000 speed is probably about 1/1500 in real life.

The manual mode... you don't need it either, it's a bit cumbersome, plus the auto mode works wonderfully. The ME was really perfectly designed.

For me the best improvement on the ME Super is that it is quieter.

the "plastic" top plates are just as good as the older ones. they don't get dented like metal top plates and have the same chrome plating, so they don't scratch like the cheap painted plastic ones. any camera without a manual mode isn't worth owning unless you're just taking snapshots with it.

 

[flavio81]

the "plastic" top plates are just as good as the older ones. they don't get dented like metal top plates and have the same chrome plating, so they don't scratch like the cheap painted plastic ones. any camera without a manual mode isn't worth owning unless you're just taking snapshots with it.

Well, we do agree! I use those cameras for snapshots and casual pictures and street photography.

For professional work one would be using medium format anyways...

 

[oxcanary]

I am now wary of A series lenses because the click stop ratchet aperture settings either freeze or go mushy after a lot of use. Happily older M series are still going strong

 

[sruddy]

For professional work one would be using medium format anyways...

I would have to say that depends on the job. I use 35mm, 120mm, and 4x5 for professional work. For me if I have to shoot quick I reach for an AF 35mm, and it usually pairs well with 35mm digital too.

 

[Autonerd]

I am waiting on batteries but am already considering a ME Super for Manual mode and higher shutter speeds.

I am a die-hard Pentaxian, and the ME Super is one of my favorite walk-around cameras, but as someone else said... for manual mode, it's not great. The buttons are a slow way to set shutter speed, and the meter display only shows the selected shutter speed and an OVER or UNDER indication. It doesn't show recommended speed, and there's no way to know if you're half a stop off or ten stops off. Can you get the right exposure with a single click of the aperture ring, or do you need to speed up your shutter by a few stops? No easy way to tell with the ME Super.

In my assessment -- and keep in mind, I really do love this camera -- it's more of an automatic camera with a manual mode than a manual camera with an automatic mode.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, Pentax doesn't make a good dual-use manual/auto camera (like the K2) in the M-series. The MX is manual only, and it's light, but I've never loved mine -- I find the shutter speed dial stiff and difficult to turn, and I don't care for its LED display, which is basically a glorified center-the-meter system like on the K1000. Being mechanical, it may well be gummed up and need a CLA.

The K2 is better, with a proper match-needle system, but it's a K-series so, like the K1000, it weighs as much as a small automobile.

The Pentax P30T is a nice camera for manual/auto use; it has the electronic version of a match-needle display, showing both selected and recommended shutter speeds. BUT -- it only sets film speed through the DX code (so no good for us bulk-loaders, unless you have DX stickers on your canisters) and it doesn't do super-long exposures in auto mode like the M-series cameras.

I've found the best compromise is Ricoh. They used polycarbonate bodies (years before Canon did!) and size- and weight-wise the models I like best (more on which in a sec) come midway between the K- and M-series Pentax bodies. They are 100% compatible with Pentax lenses but the Rikenon lenses are good too, and lighter to boot.

My fave is the XR-2s, which has manual/auto, DOF preview, mirror lock up w/ the self timer, and aperture "judas window" like the KX and MX. More importantly it has a proper match-needle meter and a proper shutter dial. KR-10 (*not* KR-10M or KR-10 Super) is similar but lacks a few features. (Not sure if they will do mega-long exposures; haven't tried.) Not as refined as a Pentax but they're inexpensive, more so if you buy the Sears-branded version (XR-2s is Sears KS Auto, KR-10 is KSX). I don't think I've ever paid more than $20 for a Sears camera; Ricoh branding might double that.

KR-10 Super (Sears KSX Super) is lighter still -- about the same weight as an ME Super. But it has an LCD meter that I find hard to read in the dark and a hair-trigger shutter release. I don't like it as much as my other Ricoh/Sears cameras.

Here's a ME Super review I wrote for Kosmo Foto: https://kosmofoto.com/2020/12/pentax-me-super-review/

Oh, and here's my KR-10 review, written before I discovered the lovely XR-2: https://kosmofoto.com/2020/03/ricoh-kr-10-review/

HTH!
Aaron

 

[Helge]

I am a die-hard Pentaxian, and the ME Super is one of my favorite walk-around cameras, but as someone else said... for manual mode, it's not great. The buttons are a slow way to set shutter speed, and the meter display only shows the selected shutter speed and an OVER or UNDER indication. It doesn't show recommended speed, and there's no way to know if you're half a stop off or ten stops off. Can you get the right exposure with a single click of the aperture ring, or do you need to speed up your shutter by a few stops? No easy way to tell with the ME Super.

In my assessment -- and keep in mind, I really do love this camera -- it's more of an automatic camera with a manual mode than a manual camera with an automatic mode.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, Pentax doesn't make a good dual-use manual/auto camera (like the K2) in the M-series. The MX is manual only, and it's light, but I've never loved mine -- I find the shutter speed dial stiff and difficult to turn, and I don't care for its LED display, which is basically a glorified center-the-meter system like on the K1000. Being mechanical, it may well be gummed up and need a CLA.

The K2 is better, with a proper match-needle system, but it's a K-series so, like the K1000, it weighs as much as a small automobile.

The Pentax P30T is a nice camera for manual/auto use; it has the electronic version of a match-needle display, showing both selected and recommended shutter speeds. BUT -- it only sets film speed through the DX code (so no good for us bulk-loaders, unless you have DX stickers on your canisters) and it doesn't do super-long exposures in auto mode like the M-series cameras.

I've found the best compromise is Ricoh. They used polycarbonate bodies (years before Canon did!) and size- and weight-wise the models I like best (more on which in a sec) come midway between the K- and M-series Pentax bodies. They are 100% compatible with Pentax lenses but the Rikenon lenses are good too, and lighter to boot.

My fave is the XR-2s, which has manual/auto, DOF preview, mirror lock up w/ the self timer, and aperture "judas window" like the KX and MX. More importantly it has a proper match-needle meter and a proper shutter dial. KR-10 (*not* KR-10M or KR-10 Super) is similar but lacks a few features. (Not sure if they will do mega-long exposures; haven't tried.) Not as refined as a Pentax but they're inexpensive, more so if you buy the Sears-branded version (XR-2s is Sears KS Auto, KR-10 is KSX). I don't think I've ever paid more than $20 for a Sears camera; Ricoh branding might double that.

KR-10 Super (Sears KSX Super) is lighter still -- about the same weight as an ME Super. But it has an LCD meter that I find hard to read in the dark and a hair-trigger shutter release. I don't like it as much as my other Ricoh/Sears cameras.

Here's a ME Super review I wrote for Kosmo Foto: https://kosmofoto.com/2020/12/pentax-me-super-review/

Oh, and here's my KR-10 review, written before I discovered the lovely XR-2: https://kosmofoto.com/2020/03/ricoh-kr-10-review/

HTH!
Aaron

What about Super A, Program A and even LX?
A well kept Super A would probably be my pick.

 

[Autonerd]

What about Super A, Program A and even LX?
A well kept Super A would probably be my pick.

I've thought a lot about getting a Super A (Super Program for me since I'm 'murican) and go back and forth -- don't know if the meter display would be easier to use (at least it shows up to 3 stops off) but you still have the buttons, which I find awkward... but maybe that's unfamiliarity. There's one on eBay I took a pass on a while back, and I keep debating whether to make another offer. It has an A-series 1.7 lens which I am curious to try with my P30t.

I haven't given much thought to an LX... I'd probably buy one if money was no object, but they're expensive, troublesome, and Eric @ Pentaxs.com no longer repairs them. I don't care that much about the hybrid mechanical/electronic shutter (honestly I rather like electronic), and the way I see it the K2 does 90% of what the LX does for 30% of the price. But I think both would exceed the light weight that the OP is looking for.

Aaron

 

[Huss]

I've thought a lot about getting a Super A (Super Program for me since I'm 'murican) and go back and forth -- don't know if the meter display would be easier to use (at least it shows up to 3 stops off) but you still have the buttons, which I find awkward... but maybe that's unfamiliarity. There's one on eBay I took a pass on a while back, and I keep debating whether to make another offer. It has an A-series 1.7 lens which I am curious to try with my P30t.

I haven't given much thought to an LX... I'd probably buy one if money was no object, but they're expensive, troublesome, and Eric @ Pentaxs.com no longer repairs them. I don't care that much about the hybrid mechanical/electronic shutter (honestly I rather like electronic), and the way I see it the K2 does 90% of what the LX does for 30% of the price. But I think both would exceed the light weight that the OP is looking for.

Aaron

I had all those cameras you mention. The K2 really is great (follow the owner's manual advice on how to change the ISO setting!!!!), with a much easier to read exposure display than the LX. The LX pretty much is dead man walking now with it's electronics, with no-one left to repair them.
I thought my Super A was excellent and you get used to the buttons. Careful w the A series 1.7 - the aperture rings basically self destruct and become inoperative.
P30t also was great - no battery cap to lose! - and it has an AE lock! The LX does not - score one for the P30t! Only downside is it is DX only - but just make sure to use DX film.
Also has the easiest to load film mechanism there is.

 

[Helge]

I had all those cameras you mention. The K2 really is great (follow the owner's manual advice on how to change the ISO setting!!!!), with a much easier to read exposure display than the LX. The LX pretty much is dead man walking now with it's electronics, with no-one left to repair them.
I thought my Super A was excellent and you get used to the buttons. Careful w the A series 1.7 - the aperture rings basically self destruct and become inoperative.
P30t also was great - no battery cap to lose! - and it has an AE lock! The LX does not - score one for the P30t! Only downside is it is DX only - but just make sure to use DX film.
Also has the easiest to load film mechanism there is.

No DX override for P30 is a big thing for me. Not even exposure compensation. How would you push or pull film? Or use film that doesn’t have DX for one reason or another.

 

[Huss]

No DX override for P30 is a big thing for me. Not even exposure compensation. How would you push or pull film? Or use film that doesn’t have DX for one reason or another.

Well, it has metered manual mode. So you could do whatever you want.

But, if you want non DX film and/or to push/pull, then the P30 is not a good choice.

 

[flavio81]

The MX is manual only, and it's light, but I've never loved mine -- I find the shutter speed dial stiff and difficult to turn, and I don't care for its LED display, which is basically a glorified center-the-meter system like on the K1000. Being mechanical, it may well be gummed up and need a CLA.

The Pentax LX is what you want.

 

[Huss]

..

I haven't given much thought to an LX... I'd probably buy one if money was no object, but they're expensive, troublesome, and Eric @ Pentaxs.com no longer repairs them. …

There’s a reason for that. He’s seen more and more broken ones, does not know how to fix them anymore with the limited supplies he has left. They have become the Contax T2 of SLRs.
It’s why I sold off mine, it was starting to get flaky.