1981 Review of the Pentax LX

unixrevolution · 10-27-2011, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by LesDMess

It is unfortunate that Pentax pioneered the spot meter but didn't implement it after.

Do you mean the Pentax handheld spotmeters, or the Spotmatic? The Spotmatic does indeed derive its name from a Spot Meter, as it was originally developed to have one, but at the last moment they decided to give it center-weighted metering, just like the LX has. Right now, I really want Pentax spot meter, because it would be so useful for Large Format.

I do agree though, an LX with Center Weighted or Spot at the flip of a switch would be rockin'. The LX would be perfect with that, Auto-aperture capability, and AE-lock. I'd consider it perfect with all that.

LesDMess · 10-27-2011, 05:44 PM

That Pentax pioneered spot metering and never incorporated into their SLR until the modern autofocus cameras was too bad. However, from all that I have used, it's as close to perfection as any!

stevebrot · 10-27-2011, 08:57 PM

Originally posted by unixrevolution

decided to give it center-weighted metering, just like the LX has

That would have been nice, but the Spotmatic has plain averaging metering. At least that is how I remember it from back-in-the-day.

Steve

unixrevolution · 10-28-2011, 06:50 AM

Originally posted by stevebrot

That would have been nice, but the Spotmatic has plain averaging metering. At least that is how I remember it from back-in-the-day.

Steve

On the Pentaxforums.com camera review and information pages, the Spotmatic is listed as having center-weighted metering.

Pentax Spotmatic - M42 Screwmount Film SLRs - Pentax Camera Database and Reviews - DSLR, Digital, and Legacy Cameras

stevebrot · 10-28-2011, 09:42 AM

Originally posted by unixrevolution

On the Pentaxforums.com camera review and information pages, the Spotmatic is listed as having center-weighted metering.

Pentax Spotmatic - M42 Screwmount Film SLRs - Pentax Camera Database and Reviews - DSLR, Digital, and Legacy Cameras

I noticed that, though I don't believe it to be true. The first I remember regarding center-weighted metering on any camera was in the mid-1970s. Before then, they were either average or spot or both. Never mind, though, that the averaging meters all sufferered from uneven sensitivity in the corners and edges.

Steve

**ChrisPlatt** · 10-28-2011, 02:23 PM

Judicious use of an averaging or center-weighted meter can be as effective most of the time.
Billions of well-exposed photos have been taken with Pentax cameras despite the lack of spot metering.
I'm not surprised Pentax left it out. It would have been an unnecessary complication for most users.
Its exclusion certainly didn't seem to hurt sales of Spotmatic and later Pentax models.
And with the advent of advanced autoexposure SLRs matrix metering just made more sense.

Chris

**TomB_tx** · 10-29-2011, 06:47 AM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

Judicious use of an averaging or center-weighted meter can be as effective most of the time.
Billions of well-exposed photos have been taken with Pentax cameras despite the lack of spot metering.
I'm not surprised Pentax left it out. It would have been an unnecessary complication for most users.
Its exclusion certainly didn't seem to hurt sales of Spotmatic and later Pentax models.
And with the advent of advanced autoexposure SLRs matrix metering just made more sense.

Chris

I'd agree - any of the metering patterns can work well if you understand it and have worked with it enough to predict the results. Pentax kept the center-weighted design through most of their manual cameras, and it was the best choice for general use at the time. I preferred the Leicaflex SL "large spot" meter, but you have to judge which part of the scene to meter. I'm not comfortable with the matrix metering, as I don't always know what it will do, so I still prefer a central spot to meter, then shift the frame.

LesDMess · 11-01-2011, 05:40 AM

I just found the link again to this 1985 booklet of the Pentax LX -> Google Translate

Click on "Suite" to next page

j0n4hpk · 12-31-2011, 11:22 PM

Thanks for the memories, LesDMess (sniff, sniff).

LesDMess · 01-01-2012, 06:27 AM

You're welcome.

Of course it's unmatched capabilities still make it quite pertinent to use today.

macTak · 01-01-2012, 07:46 AM

Thanks for the review, which had the added bonus of tests of the K50/1.2, M28/2, and M85/2.

By the way, on the lack of the spot meter, if you really wanted to use spot metering back then, I can think of a certain company that made spot meters....

**monochrome** · 01-09-2012, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by LesDMess

Besides the Alpha and the Omega, there were some other good cameras made too

.

Courtesy of members here I can now duplicate that photo

LesDMess · 01-09-2012, 07:59 PM

Did the magazine review seal the deal, or was it the elegant beauty or maybe the superior build or technical specs . . .

**monochrome** · 01-09-2012, 09:26 PM

Originally posted by LesDMess

Did the magazine review seal the deal, or was it the elegant beauty or maybe the superior build or technical specs . . .

I love reading these old articles and seeing the old ads. The article was timely because I had just gotten an LX.

The 60's and early 70's weren't all bad, though many would have us believe they were. I'd call them the heyday of over-engineering and pride of workmanship held by my father's generation contrasted by the raw cynicism of mine. The article itself reflects those higher values . . .

My graduation present was the KX and K50/1.4 in my sig. I had the Sightseeing Screwmount twice. I got a K here, then an SV from the same seller, and just recently here I finally got the LX I've lusted after for 35 years.

IMHO the SV is the most seductive camera ever produced and the engineering in the LX is sublime.

tim60 · 01-11-2012, 03:53 AM

Those were the days when reviews seemed to be written with the prospective consumer at heart - and investigating the critical operational and life-cycle issues to a consumer about to part with a substantial chunk of their hard earned.
Now, the electronics industry in partiuclar, treats its products as feature laden disposables. And the reviews of many products, whether cars or sound systems or cameras, are written in terms of which features are included, and whether they work as claimed, but the question of long-term durability and product lifecycle and legacy compatibility is not addressed.
I think that the magazines publish puerile reviews because the ads for the products pay for the magazine, and so the magazines cannot afford to put the manufacturers offside - particularly as in most industries there are very few manufacturers left - or at least genuinely independent makers - after all the takeovers and alliances. This also reduces the genuine differentiation of products.
I talked to the CEO of a large company in a niche manufacturing area who once told me - the top company in each industry makes good money, second and third make some money and the rest are almost wasting their time - unless their real business is something other than their headline activity.
I remember a good review in 1981 of the LX in Australian Photography - made me really want one, but at over double what I had paid for an MX earlier that year I could not get one. But one of my classmates did get one. Nice!
Today I got two more STak lenses delivered, and I went to the local camera shop to get filters for them. The assistant asked what camera I used - Pentax - and then he asked if I was using old lenses. I said mainly STaks - he seemed envious.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
1981 in the USSR	SteveM	Monthly Photo Contests	1	07-01-2011 05:45 AM
Pentax K7 Review	Brad Ovard	Welcomes and Introductions	8	04-21-2010 10:21 PM
New Pentax K-x Review	100meters	Pentax News and Rumors	11	02-24-2010 04:44 AM
USSR - April 1981	SteveM	Post Your Photos!	3	02-07-2009 06:08 PM
2008 k200d Mounted With 1981 K1000 Lens	shutterpuppy	Pentax DSLR Discussion	12	07-01-2008 12:44 PM

10-27-2011, 10:38 AM	#31
unixrevolution Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Waldorf, MD Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,861	Originally posted by LesDMess It is unfortunate that Pentax pioneered the spot meter but didn't implement it after. Do you mean the Pentax handheld spotmeters, or the Spotmatic? The Spotmatic does indeed derive its name from a Spot Meter, as it was originally developed to have one, but at the last moment they decided to give it center-weighted metering, just like the LX has. Right now, I really want Pentax spot meter, because it would be so useful for Large Format. I do agree though, an LX with Center Weighted or Spot at the flip of a switch would be rockin'. The LX would be perfect with that, Auto-aperture capability, and AE-lock. I'd consider it perfect with all that.

10-27-2011, 05:44 PM	#32
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235 Original Poster	That Pentax pioneered spot metering and never incorporated into their SLR until the modern autofocus cameras was too bad. However, from all that I have used, it's as close to perfection as any!

10-27-2011, 08:57 PM	#33
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by unixrevolution decided to give it center-weighted metering, just like the LX has That would have been nice, but the Spotmatic has plain averaging metering. At least that is how I remember it from back-in-the-day. Steve

10-28-2011, 06:50 AM	#34
unixrevolution Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Waldorf, MD Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,861	Originally posted by stevebrot That would have been nice, but the Spotmatic has plain averaging metering. At least that is how I remember it from back-in-the-day. Steve On the Pentaxforums.com camera review and information pages, the Spotmatic is listed as having center-weighted metering. Pentax Spotmatic - M42 Screwmount Film SLRs - Pentax Camera Database and Reviews - DSLR, Digital, and Legacy Cameras

10-28-2011, 09:42 AM	#35
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by unixrevolution On the Pentaxforums.com camera review and information pages, the Spotmatic is listed as having center-weighted metering. Pentax Spotmatic - M42 Screwmount Film SLRs - Pentax Camera Database and Reviews - DSLR, Digital, and Legacy Cameras I noticed that, though I don't believe it to be true. The first I remember regarding center-weighted metering on any camera was in the mid-1970s. Before then, they were either average or spot or both. Never mind, though, that the averaging meters all sufferered from uneven sensitivity in the corners and edges. Steve

10-28-2011, 02:23 PM	#36
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,692	Judicious use of an averaging or center-weighted meter can be as effective most of the time. Billions of well-exposed photos have been taken with Pentax cameras despite the lack of spot metering. I'm not surprised Pentax left it out. It would have been an unnecessary complication for most users. Its exclusion certainly didn't seem to hurt sales of Spotmatic and later Pentax models. And with the advent of advanced autoexposure SLRs matrix metering just made more sense. Chris

10-29-2011, 06:47 AM	#37
TomB_tx Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,446	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt Judicious use of an averaging or center-weighted meter can be as effective most of the time. Billions of well-exposed photos have been taken with Pentax cameras despite the lack of spot metering. I'm not surprised Pentax left it out. It would have been an unnecessary complication for most users. Its exclusion certainly didn't seem to hurt sales of Spotmatic and later Pentax models. And with the advent of advanced autoexposure SLRs matrix metering just made more sense. Chris I'd agree - any of the metering patterns can work well if you understand it and have worked with it enough to predict the results. Pentax kept the center-weighted design through most of their manual cameras, and it was the best choice for general use at the time. I preferred the Leicaflex SL "large spot" meter, but you have to judge which part of the scene to meter. I'm not comfortable with the matrix metering, as I don't always know what it will do, so I still prefer a central spot to meter, then shift the frame.

11-01-2011, 05:40 AM	#38
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235 Original Poster	I just found the link again to this 1985 booklet of the Pentax LX -> Google Translate Click on "Suite" to next page

12-31-2011, 11:22 PM	#39
j0n4hpk Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 293	Thanks for the memories, LesDMess (sniff, sniff).

01-01-2012, 06:27 AM	#40
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235 Original Poster	You're welcome. Of course it's unmatched capabilities still make it quite pertinent to use today.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-01-2012, 07:46 AM	#41
macTak Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 759	Thanks for the review, which had the added bonus of tests of the K50/1.2, M28/2, and M85/2. By the way, on the lack of the spot meter, if you really wanted to use spot metering back then, I can think of a certain company that made spot meters....

01-09-2012, 06:55 PM	#42
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by LesDMess Besides the Alpha and the Omega, there were some other good cameras made too . Courtesy of members here I can now duplicate that photo

01-09-2012, 07:59 PM	#43
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235 Original Poster	Did the magazine review seal the deal, or was it the elegant beauty or maybe the superior build or technical specs . . .

01-09-2012, 09:26 PM	#44
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by LesDMess Did the magazine review seal the deal, or was it the elegant beauty or maybe the superior build or technical specs . . . I love reading these old articles and seeing the old ads. The article was timely because I had just gotten an LX. The 60's and early 70's weren't all bad, though many would have us believe they were. I'd call them the heyday of over-engineering and pride of workmanship held by my father's generation contrasted by the raw cynicism of mine. The article itself reflects those higher values . . . My graduation present was the KX and K50/1.4 in my sig. I had the Sightseeing Screwmount twice. I got a K here, then an SV from the same seller, and just recently here I finally got the LX I've lusted after for 35 years. IMHO the SV is the most seductive camera ever produced and the engineering in the LX is sublime.

01-11-2012, 03:53 AM	#45
tim60 Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Photos: Albums Posts: 8,738	Those were the days when reviews seemed to be written with the prospective consumer at heart - and investigating the critical operational and life-cycle issues to a consumer about to part with a substantial chunk of their hard earned. Now, the electronics industry in partiuclar, treats its products as feature laden disposables. And the reviews of many products, whether cars or sound systems or cameras, are written in terms of which features are included, and whether they work as claimed, but the question of long-term durability and product lifecycle and legacy compatibility is not addressed. I think that the magazines publish puerile reviews because the ads for the products pay for the magazine, and so the magazines cannot afford to put the manufacturers offside - particularly as in most industries there are very few manufacturers left - or at least genuinely independent makers - after all the takeovers and alliances. This also reduces the genuine differentiation of products. I talked to the CEO of a large company in a niche manufacturing area who once told me - the top company in each industry makes good money, second and third make some money and the rest are almost wasting their time - unless their real business is something other than their headline activity. I remember a good review in 1981 of the LX in Australian Photography - made me really want one, but at over double what I had paid for an MX earlier that year I could not get one. But one of my classmates did get one. Nice! Today I got two more STak lenses delivered, and I went to the local camera shop to get filters for them. The assistant asked what camera I used - Pentax - and then he asked if I was using old lenses. I said mainly STaks - he seemed envious.