What's the best stopped-down M42 camera?

[RLangham]

This is the sort of thing a lot of people have different opinions about. I'm sure a lot of people jump to the conclusion that it's one of the Pentax Spotmatics... but is it? First is not necessarily always best, and from my standpoint most of what the Spotmatics have going for them are their small size, comparatively full feature set and very nice bundled lenses. But take away the Takumar lenses and they're just the first of many cameras that we could fairly call Spotmatic clones. Honestly, when we're looking at features I'd say even the Mamiya DTL's (not that they're necessarily a Spotmatic clone) have an edge on the Spotmatics, if you disregard the size difference.

But honestly there were a lot of these Spotmatic clones and the DTL's are just the beginning. Staying strictly within the m42 stopped-down paradigm, what cameras do you think are preeminent?

 

[Bill Burk]

Hard to beat Spotmatic II for stopped down metering M42.

 

[BradS]

Yup. The venerable Spotmatic II is my choice with the SP-1000 as a close second choice.

 

[Bill Burk]

Funny thing is the Spotmatic II came with an SMCT lens.

 

[davela]

Probably the Bessaflex by Cosina Voigtlander. It's a totally modern SLR with a bright viewfinder and an accurate TTL meter (if you need or want it). It's also expensive on the used market (about $400 and up these days).

 

[RLangham]

Probably the Bessaflex by Cosina Voigtlander. It's a totally modern SLR with a bright viewfinder and an accurate TTL meter (if you need or want it). It's also expensive on the used market (about $400 and up these days).

Wasn't it made into this century? I didn't know it was stopped-down metering only.

 

[narsuitus]

What's the best stopped-down M42 camera?

As far as I am concerned, the Fuji ST705 and the Pentax Spotmatics were the best M42 cameras.

Since I never used the built-in light meters, I do not know if they used stopped-down light metering or not.

M42 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[RLangham]

As far as I am concerned, the Fuji ST705 and the Pentax Spotmatics were the best M42 cameras.

Since I never used the built-in light meters, I do not know if they used stopped-down light metering or not.

M42 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

I will never understand having a built in light meter and never using it. Sure, I may use a spot meter for a lot of shots, but sometimes speed is of the essence in the styles I do.

 

[Paul Howell]

Chinon CE3, although stopped down, it is able to auto exposure in aperture mode with single pin lens. When the user pushes the shutter release the correct shutter speed is selected on the downward plunge. It also can be used with an autowinder, not a very good one, about 2 fps does have an interval times built in. The CM3 is a more basic design, uses LED on the outside of the viewfinder to the user who can see the lights in the corner of their eye, takes the same lens. Oh, flash syce is 1/100.

 

[RLangham]

Chinon CE3, although stopped down, it is able to auto exposure in aperture mode with single pin lens. When the user pushes the shutter release the correct shutter speed is selected on the downward plunge. It also can be used with an autowinder, not a very good one, about 2 fps does have an interval times built in. The CM3 is a more basic design, uses LED on the outside of the viewfinder to the user who can see the lights in the corner of their eye, takes the same lens. Oh, flash syce is 1/100.

Oh, I want one so bad. it was one of the ones I was thinking of when I made this discussion thread, but I can't really have an opinion as I've never even seen one in person. My Chinon CS is easily the most user-friendly of my m42 cameras, as well as one of the best looking, despite or even partially because of the GAF badging on my particular example (red logo and the retailer's model name, L-CM). Like Mike Butkus I think the brand has been sorely underrated due to the marketing niche they went for.

 

[mshchem]

I will never understand having a built in light meter and never using it. Sure, I may use a spot meter for a lot of shots, but sometimes speed is of the essence in the styles I do.

I've always used an incident meter. However the Spotmatic averaging meter always served me well in my youth. When I moved to Nikon I had a lot of screwy slides until I mastered the center weighted meter. I have had several spot meters over the years, never seemed to need them. Outdoors I usually use a meter to confirm what I already know.

My first camera was a SP 500. A couple years ago I found one in mint condition I bought for 10 bucks, I have the 8 element Super Takumar 50 1.4 . Beautiful camera.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

I agree with the recommendation of the Spotmatic II. The Spotmatics have several advantages:

1. Meticulous craftsmanship and assembly. They have a precise instrument feel.
2. They tend to be durable. Even an old ignored body often smooths out with some exercise of the shutter (but the CDS light meters are more of a problem).
3. They are compact and fit in the hand nicely.
4. The Takumar lenses are excellent optically and are often in perfect condition, decades after they were sold. Often they have no film or haze.

Problems:
1. The viewfinders are dim.
2. The light meters often need new CDS cells or other repair.

 

[RLangham]

I've always used an incident meter. However the Spotmatic averaging meter always served me well in my youth. When I moved to Nikon I had a lot of screwy slides until I mastered the center weighted meter. I have had several spot meters over the years, never seemed to need them. Outdoors I usually use a meter to confirm what I already know.

My first camera was a SP 500. A couple years ago I found one in mint condition I bought for 10 bucks, I have the 8 element Super Takumar 50 1.4 . Beautiful camera.

I've only just bought my first incident meter. It's a Kalimar convertible. I have it clipped on the side of my Yashica D as a reflected light meter right now. Very fast, quite accurate.

 

[RLangham]

I agree with the recommendation of the Spotmatic II. The Spotmatics have several advantages:

1. Meticulous craftsmanship and assembly. They have a precise instrument feel.
2. They tend to be durable. Even an old ignored body often smooths out with some exercise of the shutter (but the CDS light meters are more of a problem).
3. They are compact and fit in the hand nicely.
4. The Takumar lenses are excellent optically and are often in perfect condition, decades after they were sold. Often they have no film or haze.

Problems:
1. The viewfinders are dim.
2. The light meters often need new CDS cells or other repair.

I've only ever had one and it locked up while I was using it. I imagine there was something wrong with it to begin with, as I've used two K1000's with very smooth shutter operations and I believe that's basically the same shutter.

 

[Paul Howell]

Oh, I want one so bad. it was one of the ones I was thinking of when I made this discussion thread, but I can't really have an opinion as I've never even seen one in person. My Chinon CS is easily the most user-friendly of my m42 cameras, as well as one of the best looking, despite or even partially because of the GAF badging on my particular example (red logo and the retailer's model name, L-CM). Like Mike Butkus I think the brand has been sorely underrated due to the marketing niche they went for.

The only downside to a CE 3 is that it a little harder to trigger the shutter, more of an effort, otherwise the CE 3 is my go to M42 body followed by the CM 3, I have 2 Spots, one I bought in 1966, my first 35mm SLR, works just fine, need to send it out for cleaning and seals, light weight no nonsense. The Chinons build quality is just as good, the lens are fine, not the range of Pentax, but as any single pin M42 will work you can cobble together a nice line up. BTW I also have a GAF L, just like the CE 3 without the motor winder but a top speed of 1/2000, also sold as the Alpa 2000 Si with a lower flash sync of 1/90th. Chinon was sold under a number of dept. store labels as well.

 

[narsuitus]

I will never understand having a built in light meter and never using it. Sure, I may use a spot meter for a lot of shots, but sometimes speed is of the essence in the styles I do.

My large format and medium format cameras do not have built-in light meters.

My favorite 35mm camera (Nikon F2) does not have a built-in light meter.

Since I use so many cameras without built-in light meters, I have gotten into the habit of using a handheld light meter.

Plus, my cameras that do have built-in meters only have reflective meters. Many times, I like to use incident light meter readings.

 

[AgX]

The stop-down Praktica L models have a metering lever that hardly is to be beaten.
Thus do not overlook ergonomics.

 

[flavio81]

For me it was the Spotmatic F. I had a Fujica ST605n which had a better meter, but the execution was poor, in particular the shutter and mirror action was rough.

I agree with the recommendation of the Spotmatic II. The Spotmatics have several advantages...)

Problems:
1. The viewfinders are dim.
2. The light meters often need new CDS cells or other repair.

I consider the Spotmatics' viefinders very good. Yes, they are dimmer than average, but they make confirming precise focus very easy, they have high contrast, low distortion, good size and eyepoint.

 

[RLangham]

My large format and medium format cameras do not have built-in light meters.

My favorite 35mm camera (Nikon F2) does not have a built-in light meter.

Since I use so many cameras without built-in light meters, I have gotten into the habit of using a handheld light meter.

Plus, my cameras that do have built-in meters only have reflective meters. Many times, I like to use incident light meter readings.

I don't need a meter at all in daylight, but I will use one if I have one. I have three 4x5's and a good number of cheap medium formats (boxes and pseudo TLR's) that all lack meters. I'm not dependent by any means.

But in some lights a little confirmation is nice so as not to underexpose.

It's interesting that you mention the F2... Do you know it is now cheaper to buy it with the basic metered prism than with the DE-1? By a large factor in the case of the original basic prism, DP-1.

 

[narsuitus]

Do you know it is now cheaper to buy it with the basic metered prism than with the DE-1? By a large factor in the case of the original basic prism, DP-1.

The DE-1 was the original basic prism. When I purchased my first F2 in 1972, it came with the non-metered DE-1. The metered DP-1 prism came later.


Nikon F2 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[davela]

Wasn't it made into this century? I didn't know it was stopped-down metering only.

It was discontinued about 12 years ago or so. It is a stop down metering camera like almost all M42 SLR's - that's pretty much the M42 standard. M42 lenses, as a rule, lack a cam that tells the camera what the iris setting is. That feature is necessary for open aperture TTL metering. Some older M42 lenses do not even have iris control (these are often erroneously referred to as "preset" lenses, which are actually something slightly different). I think Pentax and/or Fujifilm briefly tried to create a system with M42 lenses and cameras that had open aperture metering capability, but it came late in the game when M42 was losing popularity. Those efforts never really succeeded on a large scale.

 

[RLangham]

It was discontinued about 12 years ago or so. It is a stop down metering camera like almost all M42 SLR's - that's pretty much the M42 standard. M42 lenses, as a rule, lack a cam that tells the camera what the iris setting is. That feature is necessary for open aperture TTL metering. Some older M42 lenses do not even have iris control (these are often erroneously referred to as "preset" lenses, which are actually something slightly different). I think Pentax and/or Fujifilm briefly tried to create a system with M42 lenses and cameras that had open aperture metering capability, but it came late in the game when M42 was losing popularity. Those efforts never really succeeded on a large scale.

Pentax, Mamiya and Praktica all created modestly sucessful lens systems for wide-open metering on M42. Praktica's was even electronic.

 

[tom43]

Bessaflex is the best by far without a doubt. I have the Spotmatic II, too. But you can easily see the 30 years between both. One look through the viewfinder will be sufficient. The Bessaflex is here equal to my FM3A.

 

[flavio81]

I think Pentax and/or Fujifilm briefly tried to create a system with M42 lenses and cameras that had open aperture metering capability, but it came late in the game when M42 was losing popularity. Those efforts never really succeeded on a large scale.

Pentax has a complete m42 lens system capable of full aperture metering. And two wonderful cameras for it: Spotmatic F, and the ES II.

 

[ic-racer]

I had a Fujica ST-701 when they first came out. It was easy to use because the button to activate the meter was right under your finger. When I got a job and had some money I was anxious to 'move up' to the Rolleiflex system with bayonet mount, open aperture metering and a tiny prism to see the lens aperture setting. But in retrospect, the Fujica was more reliable and the multicoated lenses were were pretty darn good (did anyone else besides Fuji make super-multicoated single-pin M42 lenses?).