Most recent Pentax film body?

mysterick · 01-13-2008, 03:36 PM

Just wondering. There are only "historical" models shown on the web site.

MikeH · 01-13-2008, 03:45 PM

The last designed body was the *ist, announced in 2003. The MZ-60 was the last of the MZ series, announced in 2002. The MZ-S was the last "professional" level body, from 2001.

The MZ-60 is perhaps one of the worst cameras that Pentax made. Strangely enough, it was my first camera.

mysterick · 01-14-2008, 04:14 PM

Thanks. Do they still manufacture the *ist, or any other film bodies? I just sold a ZX-5n on ebay. I pretty much use a K10D now, but when I want to shoot film I used my old work horses: K1000 and LX.

J.Scott · 01-14-2008, 04:53 PM

I may challenge your 'worst Pentax' choice; although I never used an MZ-60. I had a MZ-7 (same as ZX-7) for a few years and was really disappointed. It was plasticky and focused quite slow for an AF camera; I just never liked it all that much. Was seriously considering a Nikon for a while - anything had to be better than that camera. I paid a lot of $$ for it but sold it for next to nothing. After I sold it and before I bought my *ist DS I gladly went back to using my trusty ME Super.

To the best of my knowledge Pentax does not make an SLR film camera today.

MikeH · 01-14-2008, 05:49 PM

Well, the MZ-60 had a plastic lens mount. It could not use any lens aside from F or FA mount lenses. Even an A lens would cause the camera to blink "Av--" and would not fire the shutter. It was capable of 1 fps. It did not have a mode dial, and instead used the small LCD on top to display the shooting mode.

It was terrible. But I loved it regardless... Until i dropped it and my plastic mount FA 28-90 lens, breaking them both.

clawhammer · 01-14-2008, 10:40 PM

and not to mention the painful (and I mean that literally) little switch to change settings on the ZX-60. I'm so glad I went with the ZX-L for my film camera.

Ray Pulley · 01-15-2008, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by clawhamemr

and not to mention the painful (and I mean that literally) little switch to change settings on the ZX-60. I'm so glad I went with the ZX-L for my film camera.

I kept a ZX-L because it is the closest thing to the Pentax digital cameras in the way it operates, and is a solid performer.

I had a hard time deciding between it and the ZX-5N I had, but the higher max shutter speed of the ZX-L along with the control set being similar to the DS tipped the balance in favor of keeping the ZX-L.

Oh, I kept two MZ-S bodies as well, which are ergonomically perfect in my hands, but the operation and controls are quite different than anything Pentax ever made before or since. Regardless of that, I love the MZ-S bodies, and in fact, shot only film in one MZ-S over the holidays. It was quite refreshing to get the extra highlight DR of PRO negative film, along with the simplicity of dropping the film for development and printing without spending a single minute at the computer messing with PP. The wonderful skin tones of the film also reminded me why I liked film so much.

Ray

Jonson PL · 12-13-2008, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by Ray Pulley

I kept a ZX-L because it is the closest thing to the Pentax digital cameras in the way it operates, and is a solid performer.

I had a hard time deciding between it and the ZX-5N I had, but the higher max shutter speed of the ZX-L along with the control set being similar to the DS tipped the balance in favor of keeping the ZX-L.

Oh, I kept two MZ-S bodies as well, which are ergonomically perfect in my hands, but the operation and controls are quite different than anything Pentax ever made before or since. Regardless of that, I love the MZ-S bodies, and in fact, shot only film in one MZ-S over the holidays. It was quite refreshing to get the extra highlight DR of PRO negative film, along with the simplicity of dropping the film for development and printing without spending a single minute at the computer messing with PP. The wonderful skin tones of the film also reminded me why I liked film so much.

Ray

Hi Ray,
what PRO negative films are you using ?

Blue · 12-13-2008, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by MikeH

The last designed body was the *ist, announced in 2003. The MZ-60 was the last of the MZ series, announced in 2002. The MZ-S was the last "professional" level body, from 2001.

The MZ-60 is perhaps one of the worst cameras that Pentax made. Strangely enough, it was my first camera.

According to Dimitrov, it the *ist is still in production: *ist

Edit: However, I suspect that it is no longer in production but there maybe some new units out there on shelves.

pentaxmz · 12-14-2008, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by Blue

According to Dimitrov, it the *ist is still in production: *ist

OMG! Why would any one want this model. No offence really.... but, IMHO, this was a terrible camera. Perhaps a good try for the time, but it was not that good.

After being so, so, ticked off because Pentax dropped their promise of a digital back for the MZ-S, that was my first digital SLR. A waste of money! Later, when I understood digital technology better, I realized how ridiculous it was to release a digital back for the MZ-S.

pentaxmz · 12-14-2008, 12:54 AM

Originally posted by mysterick

Thanks. Do they still manufacture the *ist, or any other film bodies? I just sold a ZX-5n on ebay. I pretty much use a K10D now, but when I want to shoot film I used my old work horses: K1000 and LX.

Hello,

I think many would agree that one of the best (for handling, function, and even durability) 35mm film cameras is the Pentax MZ-S. I have either used or owned many different 35mm film cameras over the years. The MZ-S was really the camera that got me stuck on PK type mounts.

In migrating to digital, I now own a K20D, however, if I hadn't made a huge investment in PK type lenses, I would have switched to the Canon 40D or better.

There are a few MZ-S cameras on eBay now and I posted a message about them a few moments ago.

Blue · 12-14-2008, 09:00 AM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

The *ist and MZ-S look as complicated to operate as a digital SLR.

Chris

I skipped over the Pentax AF cameras. However, Its my understanding that the MZ-L is set up more like our digital Pentax dSLR cameras than any other Pentax AF film camera. I actually went from Pentax manual film to Nikon digital. I do have an EOS film body set up with a macro lens and ring light as well as a canon bellows.

pentaxmz · 12-14-2008, 02:29 PM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

The *ist and MZ-S look as complicated to operate as a digital SLR.

Chris

Huh? I do not understand your comment. MZ-S is not a complicated camera to operate. Not in the least. I functions in a very logical manner and one can start using it without reading the manual. However, it is also a very powerful and programmable camera, sporting many features beyond regular camera operations; to fully realize its capabilities, you need to read the manual.

The *ist is no different but this IS a digital camera! Not my favorite model! I did not like the quality of the digital images and only owned it for about 2 years.

Blue · 12-14-2008, 02:35 PM

Originally posted by pentaxmz

. . .

The *ist is no different but this IS a digital camera! Not my favorite model! I did not like the quality of the digital images and only owned it for about 2 years.

*ist was also the name of the last film camera marketed by Pentax. Go here> *ist

Jonson PL · 12-16-2008, 11:01 PM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

The *ist is a film camera. The *ist D is a digital camera.

I learned photography using classic manual focus film cameras of the 1970's.
I find most cameras made since the advent of autofocus unnecessarily complicated,
and not worth the trouble to learn to program, just to "fight the automation".
For example, I sold my Pentax PZ-1P once I saw that the instruction manual was 200 pages.

I hate the long instruction manuals as well. First 10-15 pages just worthless info, and then one generally starts to give up on it.

For intuitive electronic film cams, the MZ-5N and MZ-M are very accessible, and easy to have a go at.

01-13-2008, 03:36 PM	#1
mysterick Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: 44266 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 567	Most recent Pentax film body? Just wondering. There are only "historical" models shown on the web site.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Did Pentax ever made a WR film body?	ismaelg	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	6	03-27-2010 07:34 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax ME Film Body - $15 O.B.O.	heliphoto	Sold Items	5	09-19-2009 07:32 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax ZX-M film body	heatherslightbox	Sold Items	12	08-02-2009 05:53 PM

01-13-2008, 03:45 PM	#2
MikeH Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Edmonton, Alberta Photos: Albums Posts: 273	The last designed body was the *ist, announced in 2003. The MZ-60 was the last of the MZ series, announced in 2002. The MZ-S was the last "professional" level body, from 2001. The MZ-60 is perhaps one of the worst cameras that Pentax made. Strangely enough, it was my first camera.

01-14-2008, 04:14 PM	#3
mysterick Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: 44266 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 567 Original Poster	Thanks. Do they still manufacture the *ist, or any other film bodies? I just sold a ZX-5n on ebay. I pretty much use a K10D now, but when I want to shoot film I used my old work horses: K1000 and LX.

01-14-2008, 04:53 PM	#4
J.Scott Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,675	I may challenge your 'worst Pentax' choice; although I never used an MZ-60. I had a MZ-7 (same as ZX-7) for a few years and was really disappointed. It was plasticky and focused quite slow for an AF camera; I just never liked it all that much. Was seriously considering a Nikon for a while - anything had to be better than that camera. I paid a lot of $$ for it but sold it for next to nothing. After I sold it and before I bought my *ist DS I gladly went back to using my trusty ME Super. To the best of my knowledge Pentax does not make an SLR film camera today.

01-14-2008, 05:49 PM	#5
MikeH Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Edmonton, Alberta Photos: Albums Posts: 273	Well, the MZ-60 had a plastic lens mount. It could not use any lens aside from F or FA mount lenses. Even an A lens would cause the camera to blink "Av--" and would not fire the shutter. It was capable of 1 fps. It did not have a mode dial, and instead used the small LCD on top to display the shooting mode. It was terrible. But I loved it regardless... Until i dropped it and my plastic mount FA 28-90 lens, breaking them both.

01-14-2008, 10:40 PM	#6
clawhammer Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Logan, Utah Photos: Gallery Posts: 971	and not to mention the painful (and I mean that literally) little switch to change settings on the ZX-60. I'm so glad I went with the ZX-L for my film camera.

01-15-2008, 09:28 PM	#7
Ray Pulley Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Fallon Nevada Photos: Albums Posts: 504	Originally posted by clawhamemr and not to mention the painful (and I mean that literally) little switch to change settings on the ZX-60. I'm so glad I went with the ZX-L for my film camera. I kept a ZX-L because it is the closest thing to the Pentax digital cameras in the way it operates, and is a solid performer. I had a hard time deciding between it and the ZX-5N I had, but the higher max shutter speed of the ZX-L along with the control set being similar to the DS tipped the balance in favor of keeping the ZX-L. Oh, I kept two MZ-S bodies as well, which are ergonomically perfect in my hands, but the operation and controls are quite different than anything Pentax ever made before or since. Regardless of that, I love the MZ-S bodies, and in fact, shot only film in one MZ-S over the holidays. It was quite refreshing to get the extra highlight DR of PRO negative film, along with the simplicity of dropping the film for development and printing without spending a single minute at the computer messing with PP. The wonderful skin tones of the film also reminded me why I liked film so much. Ray

12-13-2008, 02:18 PM	#8
Jonson PL Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,842	Originally posted by Ray Pulley I kept a ZX-L because it is the closest thing to the Pentax digital cameras in the way it operates, and is a solid performer. I had a hard time deciding between it and the ZX-5N I had, but the higher max shutter speed of the ZX-L along with the control set being similar to the DS tipped the balance in favor of keeping the ZX-L. Oh, I kept two MZ-S bodies as well, which are ergonomically perfect in my hands, but the operation and controls are quite different than anything Pentax ever made before or since. Regardless of that, I love the MZ-S bodies, and in fact, shot only film in one MZ-S over the holidays. It was quite refreshing to get the extra highlight DR of PRO negative film, along with the simplicity of dropping the film for development and printing without spending a single minute at the computer messing with PP. The wonderful skin tones of the film also reminded me why I liked film so much. Ray Hi Ray, what PRO negative films are you using ?

12-13-2008, 05:42 PM	#9
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by MikeH The last designed body was the ist, announced in 2003. The MZ-60 was the last of the MZ series, announced in 2002. The MZ-S was the last "professional" level body, from 2001. The MZ-60 is perhaps one of the worst cameras that Pentax made. Strangely enough, it was my first camera. According to Dimitrov, it the ist is still in production: *ist Edit: However, I suspect that it is no longer in production but there maybe some new units out there on shelves.

12-14-2008, 12:48 AM	#10
pentaxmz Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 659	Originally posted by Blue According to Dimitrov, it the ist is still in production: ist OMG! Why would any one want this model. No offence really.... but, IMHO, this was a terrible camera. Perhaps a good try for the time, but it was not that good. After being so, so, ticked off because Pentax dropped their promise of a digital back for the MZ-S, that was my first digital SLR. A waste of money! Later, when I understood digital technology better, I realized how ridiculous it was to release a digital back for the MZ-S.

12-14-2008, 12:54 AM	#11
pentaxmz Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 659	Originally posted by mysterick Thanks. Do they still manufacture the *ist, or any other film bodies? I just sold a ZX-5n on ebay. I pretty much use a K10D now, but when I want to shoot film I used my old work horses: K1000 and LX. Hello, I think many would agree that one of the best (for handling, function, and even durability) 35mm film cameras is the Pentax MZ-S. I have either used or owned many different 35mm film cameras over the years. The MZ-S was really the camera that got me stuck on PK type mounts. In migrating to digital, I now own a K20D, however, if I hadn't made a huge investment in PK type lenses, I would have switched to the Canon 40D or better. There are a few MZ-S cameras on eBay now and I posted a message about them a few moments ago.

12-14-2008, 09:00 AM	#12
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt The *ist and MZ-S look as complicated to operate as a digital SLR. Chris I skipped over the Pentax AF cameras. However, Its my understanding that the MZ-L is set up more like our digital Pentax dSLR cameras than any other Pentax AF film camera. I actually went from Pentax manual film to Nikon digital. I do have an EOS film body set up with a macro lens and ring light as well as a canon bellows.

12-14-2008, 02:29 PM	#13
pentaxmz Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 659	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt The ist and MZ-S look as complicated to operate as a digital SLR. Chris Huh? I do not understand your comment. MZ-S is not a complicated camera to operate. Not in the least. I functions in a very logical manner and one can start using it without reading the manual. However, it is also a very powerful and programmable camera, sporting many features beyond regular camera operations; to fully realize its capabilities, you need to read the manual. The ist is no different but this IS a digital camera! Not my favorite model! I did not like the quality of the digital images and only owned it for about 2 years.

12-14-2008, 02:35 PM	#14
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by pentaxmz . . . The ist is no different but this IS a digital camera! Not my favorite model! I did not like the quality of the digital images and only owned it for about 2 years. ist was also the name of the last film camera marketed by Pentax. Go here> *ist

12-16-2008, 11:01 PM	#15
Jonson PL Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,842	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt The ist is a film camera. The ist D is a digital camera. I learned photography using classic manual focus film cameras of the 1970's. I find most cameras made since the advent of autofocus unnecessarily complicated, and not worth the trouble to learn to program, just to "fight the automation". For example, I sold my Pentax PZ-1P once I saw that the instruction manual was 200 pages. I hate the long instruction manuals as well. First 10-15 pages just worthless info, and then one generally starts to give up on it. For intuitive electronic film cams, the MZ-5N and MZ-M are very accessible, and easy to have a go at.