what Pentax body auto would you suggest?

[photogear]

Hi,
I already have a Pentax K1000 is good condition.

Lately I have been given three lenses:
- 50mm (smc FA) f1,4
- mid-range smc 28-80mm (f3,5-5.6)
- mid-range smc 28-90mm (3,5-5.6)

I intend to find out a Pentax body auto to especially use the 50mm. The MZ series don't appeal to me and thru my readings I got across the Pentax Z-1n as a good option.

What are your thoughts on this?

 

[Pioneer]

PZ1p is an ecellent choice.

 

[Paul Howell]

PZ1 is a good camera, the MZ1 had a metal body and faster film advance, other wise not too different. Just be careful of the bottom feeder bodies, standard K, and M42 with adaptor will not work need KA. For cheap, the SF1N, first generation does not have all the modes of the PZ1, manual, aperture, and program, layout is little odd, but a workhorse, you can get a body only for around $20.00 to $30.00 U.S. The early Pentax AF glass is sharp, again not too expensive as long you stay away from fast or limited edition lens.

 

[Huss]

Pentax Super A or Super Program. They are updated ME Supers and very nice to use.

 

[Huss]

I also really like the K2, which is the top of the range of the K series that the K1000 is the bottom of...

Similar size, weight etc.

 

[AndroclesC]

I also really like the K2, a full-featured body.

 

[removed account4]

MEsuper, small, and perfect, easy to use responsive great!
what Huss said

 

[Billy Axeman]

I also really like the K2, a full-featured body.

Most K2's have stuck ASA- and Exposure compensation rings (around the mount) because of sticky grease, and the rings are awkward to use even if they run smooth. The coupling ring inside the mirror box to the aperture on the lens is also often running reluctantly because of old oil (slow needle in the viewfinder). For a CLA you need to remove the mount, the ASA- and Exposure factor rings, the top plate and even the front plate. Mounting the front plate is very tricky, with conical rings behind the screws to keep it perfectly positioned and all the rings lined out. The mounting screws on the front plate must be fastened sequentially with exactly the same force to keep the plate flat or otherwise the rings are stuck despite being freshly oiled. The whole concept is a disaster from a technical point of view which is *just* working, hence the short production run of this camera.

 

[Billy Axeman]

MEsuper, small, and perfect, easy to use responsive great!
what Huss said

The ME Super is one of the nicest Pentax cameras to use, but unfortunately it is also the most unreliable. There are a bunch of variations: ME, ME Super, MV, MV-1, MG. The top plate on some of these camera's looks chromed brass but it is actually chrome on plastic.

 

[Finn lyle]

Super A is a fantastic body, if you can do without shutter priority or 1/2000 s the program plus is great too, and usually a lot cheaper. The display of the Program plus is not ideal (requires light to view) but iirc the super A doesn’t suffer this flaw. I keep an old program plus as a backup body and its never failed me. Very similar to the ME super but with a complete automatic mode. No mechanical options but if your going for auto, that’s probably not the point anyway. The lx is always an option too...

 

[Huss]

Most K2's have stuck ASA- and Exposure compensation rings (around the mount) because of sticky grease, and the rings are awkward to use even if they run smooth. The coupling ring inside the mirror box to the aperture on the lens is also often running reluctantly because of old oil (slow needle in the viewfinder). For a CLA you need to remove the mount, the ASA- and Exposure factor rings, the top plate and even the front plate. Mounting the front plate is very tricky, with conical rings behind the screws to keep it perfectly positioned and all the rings lined out. The mounting screws on the front plate must be fastened sequentially with exactly the same force to keep the plate flat or otherwise the rings are stuck despite being freshly oiled. The whole concept is a disaster from a technical point of view which is *just* working, hence the short production run of this camera.

That stuck ISO ring issue is nearly always due to user error. I’ve seen a few that were described as stuck but actually worked as designed. This is a case of read the manual (available online). The exp comp setting has to be on zero for Iso ring to move easily. It is very easy to knock it off zero when adjusting Iso.
It definitely IS fiddly to adjust, but still easy to adjust if done as recommended.

 

[Huss]

Super A is a fantastic body, if you can do without shutter priority or 1/2000 s the program plus is great too, and usually a lot cheaper. The display of the Program plus is not ideal (requires light to view) but iirc the super A doesn’t suffer this flaw. I keep an old program plus as a backup body and its never failed me. Very similar to the ME super but with a complete automatic mode. No mechanical options but if your going for auto, that’s probably not the point anyway. The lx is always an option too...

The SuperA has a display illuminating button for low light use.

 

[johnha]

The Super-A (Super Program) is a good choice, although some now have flaky electronics. I'd agree with most of the other comments.

Bodies not yet mentioned:
- P30n, P30T have Man, Av & Program (earlier P30 only had Manual & Program) - these were the last 'proper' manual focus SLRs from Pentax. Reliant on DX coding but latest and therefore likely to be most reliable.
- P50 - slightly older, again reliant on DX coding but has Man, Av and two programs (speed & depth). Can take the Motordrive-A which is much better than the MEII winder.

 

[photogear]

although i am late to reply, thx all for your inputs.
i think i am gonna stick with the PZ1n when i will decide to purchase a second Pentax body
one thing i realize while getting thru the analog Pentax bodies: it is as though this brandmark did not put an emphasis on longlasting products before they switch to the digital products, if you compare with his main competitiors (Nikon, Canon, Olympus).
Roughly, Pentax made the Pz series between 1990-95 and then went on with the Mz series (cheaper and not as reliable), ending this decade in a questionnable way...

 

[Autonerd]

one thing i realize while getting thru the analog Pentax bodies: it is as though this brandmark did not put an emphasis on longlasting products before they switch to the digital products, if you compare with his main competitiors (Nikon, Canon, Olympus).
Roughly, Pentax made the Pz series between 1990-95 and then went on with the Mz series (cheaper and not as reliable), ending this decade in a questionnable way...

Hasn't been my experience. My first "real" camera was my grandfather's KX, new in '75 and still working just fine despite me dragging it all over the world. (45 years without a CLA.) My MG still works though it's been subject to abusive conditions (bad storage with a LOT of heat). I've acquired an ME super that works fine. MX had a bad shutter but it looked like it had been pretty badly abused. Granted, the P30T was pretty plasticky... first one I got was non-functional but the second works fine.

 

[photogear]

Hasn't been my experience. My first "real" camera was my grandfather's KX, new in '75 and still working just fine despite me dragging it all over the world. (45 years without a CLA.) My MG still works though it's been subject to abusive conditions (bad storage with a LOT of heat). I've acquired an ME super that works fine. MX had a bad shutter but it looked like it had been pretty badly abused. Granted, the P30T was pretty plasticky... first one I got was non-functional but the second works fine.

I still have 2 Pentax K1000 and they are working perfectly.
I was talking about the last analog bodies Pentax offered before their shift to digital.
The purpose of that thread was to explore options related to a Pentax auto-focus that i would add up to my gears..

 

[Les Sarile]

I still have 2 Pentax K1000 and they are working perfectly.
I was talking about the last analog bodies Pentax offered before their shift to digital.
The purpose of that thread was to explore options related to a Pentax auto-focus that i would add up to my gears..

Why autofocus when your lenses are not?

If you want to use manual focus lenses, it is very advantageous to use manual focus cameras. This is specially true if you can take advantage of the gigantic viewfinders of something like the MX which has the largest viewfinder magnification of any fixed prism SLR.

All AF cameras - and this is true for all models and brands, have tiny viewfinders because they are intended to use autofocus.

 

[photogear]

I already have 2 K1000
and i have been given AF mount K lenses

 

[Les Sarile]

I already have 2 K1000
and i have been given AF mount K lenses

It's arguable whether or not 2 K1000 s equal an MX . . .

Anyway I am not familiar with AF Pentax or their lenses . . .

 

[Chan Tran]

It's arguable whether or not 2 K1000 s equal an MX . . .

Anyway I am not familiar with AF Pentax or their lenses . . .

No number of K1000 would add up to an MX. Among Pentax manual exposure cameras I like the MX best and the K1000 least. That counting all other Pentax manual cameras like the Spotmatic, S series etc..

 

[R.Gould]

I already have 2 K1000
and i have been given AF mount K lenses

Pentax af mount lenses should fit and work fine with a K1000, at least, with my MF pentax's I use AF lenses, Pentax never changed the K mount, just allowed extra features for their AF cameras, but with, for instance a ME super or K 1000 you simply lose the AF features, but you still get Aperture priorty with no problems, I believe all Pentax K mount lenses can be used on any K mount body, I have used a basic K mount lens on a AF body, I only had manual exposure and focus, but it worked

 

[Les Sarile]

No number of K1000 would add up to an MX. Among Pentax manual exposure cameras I like the MX best and the K1000 least. That counting all other Pentax manual cameras like the Spotmatic, S series etc..

The difference in viewfinder magnification was a revelation the first time I looked through the MX compared to my Canon EOS. I wondered how it was possible to put it in the smallest SLR body!

 

[Chan Tran]

The difference in viewfinder magnification was a revelation the first time I looked through the MX compared to my Canon EOS. I wondered how it was possible to put it in the smallest SLR body!

It is possible to put in a high magnification finder like that of the MX in other cameras large or small but newer cameras tend to leave room for the display outside of the viewing area. The magnification is lower to give eye relief.