[Finn]

I use a ZX-M as my film body, and I really do love that little camera. Sure, it's made of plastic and has a plastic lens mount (!), but it takes consistently sharp, well-exposed photos roll after roll. It's also very compact and weighs nothing, so I always keep it tucked away in my camera bag, just in case I feel like shooting film (probably only 5% of the time these days... ).

[egarrard]

Doesn't the ZX-M have a tiny pentamirror viewfinder compared to the other MF SLR's? Mine's currently cased and on the shelf, but if I ever get around using it, I'll double-check.

It lacks lots of small features compared to the similar ZX-5n, but the biggest disadvantage would have to be the lack of a built-in flash.

As much as I like MF SLRs, I can't recommend this camera. The it's 'budget' design really impacts the overall build quality, although the electronics and photos are fine. The plastic mount is easily worn, so that's no good, either.

BTW, my favorite MF SLR would have to be the Super Program.

A) I've never had a problem with the plastic mount. Granted, I've only had the camera for 8 years.

B) Yes, it has a pentamirror viewfinder. It's still not bad. I prefer it to the pentaprism one on my MZ-5n. There is a slight black border around the scene that helps with contrast and framing.

C) You can't spare $40 for a flash? My Sigma 728AF works great and will even work well on the K10D when it gets here. (Probably more accurate than the P-TTL ones, if all the threads about them are right.) The 728AF will also do bounce flash. The popup on the Mz-5n won't. The puny flash on the MZ-5n is actually a disadvantage to me.

D) The build quality is exactly the same as the MZ-5n. The MZ-M is only missing a few additions (autofocus, spot metering, that silly panorama thing). And the light weight is a real benefit compared to the MZ-5n. The MZ-M and my 40mm pancake can't be beat as a pocket camera, even by the DSLRs.

[Finn]

The MZ-M and my 40mm pancake can't be beat as a pocket camera, even by the DSLRs.

Hey, that's a great setup!

[GaryML]

I would skip the entry level MZ-M camera and get one the well-made manual focus classics. A quick check of KEH shows a lot of good deals :

Program Plus in EX condition for $89 US
P3N in EX condition for $99 US
MX in EX condition for $199 US
LX with FA-1 finder in EX condition for $525 US

You can't go wrong with any of those. I use an LX and it is a fine, durable and dependable camera. I had the "sticky mirror" problem repaired by Pentax about 12 years ago and it has worked fine ever since. And the shutter speed markings aren't going to wear off on that shutter dial!

(And the most expensive K1000 at KEH is $165, not $300 as someone stated.)

[JeffP30t]

I agree with Gary, but I'll add the Super A/Super Program to that list. I see that KEH has a couple Super Programs in stock for under $100. (I used one for years, and might be persuaded to sell you mine, but shipping from the US would probably cost more than the camera.)

Super Program/Super A Pros:
TTL flash (the only other manual focus camera with TTL flash is the LX)
DOF preview
Pushbutton shutter speed set (fast once you get used to it; no dial - no numbers to wear off!)
Top-of-camera LCD for shutter speed
Uses easy-to-find ME Winder II (and cheap third-party copies)
1/125 X-sync
All four AE modes available with A or newer lenses - M, Av, Tv and P (Tv isn't common on manual-focus Pentaxes)
Typical 80's SLR features (PC flash connector, cable release socket, real glass pentaprism, reliable electronic shutter, uses standard button cells)
Not aware of any chronic service problems

Cons:
Shutter is a bit loud - well, compared to my ZX-5n, it sounds like slamming a car door.
Pushbutton shutter speed set (some people prefer dials)
Manual film speed set only - no DX contacts
No mirror lock up
Electronic shutter won't work without batteries
Not as durable, or cool-looking as an LX (but what is?)

[cyg]

(And the most expensive K1000 at KEH is $165, not $300 as someone stated.)

Hi Gary,

This thread was started back in September last year and at the time there were indeed some K1000 in the $300 region -- I did not make that up!

And there are actually a couple going for around that price right now (with lens).

If they do sell for that price, by all means -- why not ?

.

[GaryML]

Hi Gary,

This thread was started back in September last year and at the time there were indeed some K1000 in the $300 region -- I did not make that up!

And there are actually a couple going for around that price right now (with lens).

If they do sell for that price, by all means -- why not ?

.

My apologies: I didn't check the dates and I never really paid much attention to resale prices for the K1000. I just did a quick check of the KEH prices at the time of my post.

Personally I wouldn't pay very much money for a K1000 body when there are better bodies available at low prices. The K1000 was an entry level model and I found it to be big and clunky. But it certainly is a reliable manual camera and they sold a bunch of them.

[wolfee]

This is the only film SLR I have used for almost 10 years. It does have a lot of cheap components in it, but seems to work reliably because it is so simple. Also note that the film handling mechanism, mirror and shutter is the same as all the more expensive AF versions up to and including the ZX-5n. The plastic lens mount is a non issue. I suspect if one were to micro measure it, you would find a polycarbonate mount can be produced with less warp than a mass produced stainless steel one. Also, it doesn't put wear marks on my 43 Limited. The simple 2 segment meter is flawless. I find the memory lock more usefull than an autobracket for shooting difficult scenes. The viewfinder, with pentamirror, was measured brighter than a ZX-5n by Pop Photo magazine. I suspect because 100%of the light is directed to the eyepiece and none is diverted for autofocusing. Pentax should be embarrassed at how easily the printing wears off the knobs. My only other 2 Pentaxs were a ME Super and LX. Both were much more satisfying to use, but neither took better pictures than the ZX-M.

[Jonson PL]

The MZ-M is a great camera. It was my first pentax camera btw. It can perform just like your MX and shoot aperture priority, or can shoot manaul like the K1000, plus program and shutter priority.

Although Pentax chose to install a pentamirror, its surprisingly bright and very crisp. You can clearly see the split screen microprism. The viewfinder readouts are also nice and clear. The Depth of Field Preview button as Pedro mentioned is a very good asset as its almost only found on higher end slrs/dslrs.

I did not know that the MZ-M had a split screen microprism, for easier manual focus ?

I find the memory lock more usefull than an autobracket for shooting difficult scenes. The viewfinder, with pentamirror, was measured brighter than a ZX-5n by Pop Photo magazine. I suspect because 100%of the light is directed to the eyepiece and none is diverted for autofocusing.

Interesting

[Ratmagiclady]

I'm going to read people's impressions above a bit more carefully, but I'm in a position where maybe if I get impatient to put any glass whatsoever on an incoming DSLR I can score one with an SMC-A 50/f2 for some token amount. I did pick the thing up and it felt like one of those mockeries from Wal-Mart. They do have physical dials, at least, and they'd certainly be light and small to carry... But. Do these things have any prayer of shooting straight, or would it be a waste of batteries and film to even try?

(After reading, it seems the reviews are surprisingly-positive. I should add that the only reason I'm even considering this when I'd much rather have something small and solid and older for film backup is due to the holiday season: the 'body only' I've lucked into means, well, I *should* be able to last until I can put an FA 50 on there and not Scrooge out this season, but, just maybe it'll be down to wanting to put glass, any glass, on the front of the thing, and do it cheaper. )

[Ratmagiclady]

Further sidebar: People used to see me toting a 6x7 with a handle-mount flash around weddings, and say, 'how can you *carry* that?

I'd be like, "Well, they *say* this is remarkably light and compact for the format, but actually I find it's just about solid enough."