[magkelly]

I've always loved Spotties with a passion and I'm very smitten with my GAF but ever since I picked up the black KX I have not been able to hardly put it down. My K1000's are totally forgotten. My Yashica's are almost redundant. Even my K-x DSLR is feeling a little neglected. There is no question in my mind that this camera is darned near the perfect film SLR. Even the much lamented "design flaws" make perfect sense to me actually using it and actually I find having to actually think about them very helpful.

I love the unusual match needle system on this one and I like having to think about turning the meter on before I use it and I like having to make sure the camera is off before I'm done. I shoot both right and left eye and the wind lever actually does not get in my eye like some of the reviews I've seen mentioned. I think the design on this camera is the absolute shiz. No way I'd pick an ME Super over this one. The smaller size is cool but otherwise I don't much like the ME design much to begin with. As far as I am concerned the KX just totally blows it away. This is a totally stellar camera.

My only regret is that I can't really afford to send it off to Eric right now for proper tune up. It's pretty clean actually and probably doesn't really need it just yet but I'm going to do it sooner or later anyway send the KX and the Spottie F in just to make sure that they last me for the rest of my life. No way I'd ever sell either of them. I'm just having way too much fun here. KX has my vote, 100%, no question about it.

[PPPPPP42]

Something else to consider, auto features take auto lenses so make sure you want to be on that side of the fence before you go there because A lenses are comically overpriced right now thanks to their usefulness on DSLR's wheras K and M lenses can be had for pocket change.

I use my K1000 because I love simple things, I will be rather heavily back into my Super Program when eric gives it back (first CLA since new and I just figured it was time) because it can do damn near everything with the collection of A lenses and the TTL flash I have. The only advantage the five times more expensive and maintenance prone LX would have is the drool worthy viewfinder and amazing built in light meter. I don't know why people cite the LX working without batteries as a feature, what the hell would you do with an LX with the light meter out anyways, calculate sunny 16 before every shot? It takes a total of 15 seconds and any coin to change the batteries on the S.P. which take up less space than a lens cap in the camera bag or pocket and can be found at basically any store (including auto parts stores amusingly enough). The LX dust and weather sealing is fairly well worthless as the lenses that work with it are very much not dust or moisture resistant.

EDIT: hmm after some research on this site the gap narrows, I thought the LX was a 100% viewfinder, guess the S.P. is closer than I thought there, and it looks like the S.P. calculates for 3200 ISO and the LX is 1600. LX flash sync looks to be slower too. S.P. does auto features on shutter speeds down to 15, the LX down to 125 before you have to go to M mode I see. Wasn't the LX a spot meter? it says center weight. If they are both center weight, off the film or no I am not impressed with just the extra low light metering.
I just took everyone's word on the LX hype but I'm really failing to see the appeal now that I've actually done the homework.

[philippe]

Something else to consider, auto features take auto lenses so make sure you want to be on that side of the fence before you go there because A lenses are comically overpriced right now thanks to their usefulness on DSLR's wheras K and M lenses can be had for pocket change.

I use my K1000 because I love simple things, I will be rather heavily back into my Super Program when eric gives it back (first CLA since new and I just figured it was time) because it can do damn near everything with the collection of A lenses and the TTL flash I have. The only advantage the five times more expensive and maintenance prone LX would have is the drool worthy viewfinder and amazing built in light meter. I don't know why people cite the LX working without batteries as a feature, what the hell would you do with an LX with the light meter out anyways, calculate sunny 16 before every shot? It takes a total of 15 seconds and any coin to change the batteries on the S.P. which take up less space than a lens cap in the camera bag or pocket and can be found at basically any store (including auto parts stores amusingly enough). The LX dust and weather sealing is fairly well worthless as the lenses that work with it are very much not dust or moisture resistant.

EDIT: hmm after some research on this site the gap narrows, I thought the LX was a 100% viewfinder, guess the S.P. is closer than I thought there, and it looks like the S.P. calculates for 3200 ISO and the LX is 1600. LX flash sync looks to be slower too. S.P. does auto features on shutter speeds down to 15, the LX down to 125 before you have to go to M mode I see. Wasn't the LX a spot meter? it says center weight. If they are both center weight, off the film or no I am not impressed with just the extra low light metering.
I just took everyone's word on the LX hype but I'm really failing to see the appeal now that I've actually done the homework.

Perhaps you might be right in the same way you might be wrong...

The LX concept was designed in the late 1970's and brought out on the market in 1980.

In the beginning, the very first LX only got ASA 1600, soon later it got ASA 3200, and other details got ameliorated too.
Flash sync was then among the fastest doable with horizontal running shutters.

In the more than 15 years I worked professionally with my LX equipment, I never missed the spot-metering; that continuous reflective metering system was so extremely reliable. It never came up to want something else.
Any way, in rare situations, when light conditions where so delicate, I used a hand held light meter, a Gossen Variosix F or a Pentax digital spot meter, that's what any pro used to do then...

The sealing was meant to protect the inner, complex yet very precise, mechanics of the camera body. Above all it was to avoid grit getting in the rolls of the rather delicate Titanium curtains, provoking little dents, again this was 1980.
That the then progressive sealing was more or less weather resistant, was a surplus that helped sell the product. BTW, nowadays, the weather sealing got much better as technology evolved.

Yes, you are right, in the light of the actual DSLR's, the LX is rather ancient, but what do you expect of a 32 years old pro level camera...
It's precisely these pro cameras that are getting outdated faster than the others!

One has to assess things in their right perspective.

[LesDMess]

For historical perspective, these were the all pro bodies of the time.



All have interchangeable viewfinders and screens,titanium curtains and aperture priority auto expose capability. There were numerous other pro bodies but non interchangeable finders. There were other interchangeable viewfinder pro bodies but not aperture priority auto expose. If you read the reviews of the time - when they use to actually disassemble to see their innards, you will know that all of these were built very well but Pentax provided extra sealing for the LX and randomly rain tested in production.

These all have their individual strenghts such as the XK has the highest sync speed of 1/100. The New F-1 has spot meter and shutter priority options. The F3 was first to use the LCD. The LX has the most shutter speeds available when battery is exhausted.

Unique to the LX is the widest single unassisted metering range ever for any camera (even lightmeters?) past or present of EV -6.5 to EV +20, off the film metering called IDM (Integrated Direct Metering) that meters the scene in realtime for as long as it takes to auto expose, no shutter blind needed, most shutter speeds available without batteries - including manual self timer, random selection of any frame multiexposure capability just to name a few.

No doubt that if there ever is a Camera Hall of Fame the Pentax LX would get in on the first ballot!

[PPPPPP42]

No doubt that if there ever is a Camera Hall of Fame the Pentax LX would get in on the first ballot!

Already has, at least in a popularity contest: The "Best" Pentax Cameras I think thats part of the problem.

I don't doubt that the LX is an absolutely amazing camera body with several key points nothing else has, but considering you can pick up a Super Program for $25 in perfect working order or even with an A501.7 lens for $50, and an LX body with no lens needing an expensive CLA usually costs four times that I am fairly certain that its just not living up to its artificially inflated value (that's without the cost of all those extra bits like other viewfinders too). Nobody looking to buy one now is really concerned with what it was when it came out, its what it is compared to what else is available now in film bodies that is important. I almost bought one just based on its reputation, and even seeing the facts having the amazing LX still appeals to me just to have it, its the pride of the Pentax fleet.

Also I've always wondered, what other screens for it are actually worth the money in your experience (I see they are not cheap)? I've never wanted for other than its normal angle stock super big screen with split prism and micro collar so I never really saw interchangeable viewfinders as an advantage, just another feature.

[LesDMess]

No doubt that for a camera that was in production a long time, it - and especially it's accessories, are very high priced and scarce.

Also no doubt that all it's features may never be used much or used at all. Like who needs random access to each frame - with exceptional accuracy? Who needs to be able to meter while keeping the mirror in the locked up mode? I've conducted multi hour long auto exposures but what percentage of users take advantage of this? Good as the build is, it is not likely I will subject it to any abuse.

[tabl10s]

The LX was the smallest, lightest and had the most advanced metering system. I kept my FC-1/FB-1 on 98% of the time till the Wife knocked tha camera to the ground and broke the Action Finder(pissed me off). LX beats an MX and KX hands down..

[gofour3]

For historical perspective, these were the all pro bodies of the time.



All have interchangeable viewfinders and screens,titanium curtains and aperture priority auto expose capability. There were numerous other pro bodies but non interchangeable finders. There were other interchangeable viewfinder pro bodies but not aperture priority auto expose. If you read the reviews of the time - when they use to actually disassemble to see their innards, you will know that all of these were built very well but Pentax provided extra sealing for the LX and randomly rain tested in production.

These all have their individual strenghts such as the XK has the highest sync speed of 1/100. The New F-1 has spot meter and shutter priority options. The F3 was first to use the LCD. The LX has the most shutter speeds available when battery is exhausted.

Unique to the LX is the widest single unassisted metering range ever for any camera (even lightmeters?) past or present of EV -6.5 to EV +20, off the film metering called IDM (Integrated Direct Metering) that meters the scene in realtime for as long as it takes to auto expose, no shutter blind needed, most shutter speeds available without batteries - including manual self timer, random selection of any frame multiexposure capability just to name a few.

No doubt that if there ever is a Camera Hall of Fame the Pentax LX would get in on the first ballot!

Interesting comparison, thanks for posting!

I guess the K2DMD was Pentax’s first stab at the “semi pro/advanced amateur” 35mm market, even though it did not have removable viewfiders or screens it did have many other features. It also has a flash sync time of 1/125.

The LX metering range does beat the Spotmeter and the Pentax 67 TTL, but my Gossen Luna-Pro SBC has a range of -8 to +24 EV. Still very impressive for a built in meter.

Phil.

[LesDMess]

Interesting comparison, thanks for posting!

I guess the K2DMD was Pentax’s first stab at the “semi pro/advanced amateur” 35mm market, even though it did not have removable viewfiders or screens it did have many other features. It also has a flash sync time of 1/125.

The LX metering range does beat the Spotmeter and the Pentax 67 TTL, but my Gossen Luna-Pro SBC has a range of -8 to +24 EV. Still very impressive for a built in meter.

Phil.

The K2/K2DMD - as well as numerous others, started using vertical run shutters and the shorter travel time increased the sync speeds due to its much shorter travel time compared to horizontal run shutters. The XK has a horizontal run shutter - as the others I showed above, and believe it still has the highest sync speed for that type.

I don't have a SBC but according to the specs -> http://www.butkus.org/chinon/flashes_meters/luna-pro_sbc/luna-pro-3-2.htm even though it uses a silicone blue cel, it only has a single range of EV -6 to EV +15 with varying ranges of EV -8 to EV +2 that are likely calculated.

[ChrisPlatt]

Of the Pentax models mentioned so far here's my ranking in order of personal preference:

1. KX - The first Pentax SLR body I owned, and still my favorite for everyday use.
2. K2DMD - For my purposes a Pentax KX with autoexposure option.
3. LX - Excellent for special situations or when system accessories are required.
4. MX - My choice only when compactness is the primary concern.

Chris

[womble]

Of the Pentax models mentioned so far here's my ranking in order of personal preference:

1. KX - The first Pentax SLR body I owned, and still my favorite for everyday use.
2. K2DMD - For my purposes a Pentax KX with autoexposure option.
3. LX - Excellent for special situations or when system accessories are required.
4. MX - My choice only when compactness is the primary concern.

Chris

Funny old world... mine would be:

1. LX. My go-to film camera. It's the one I take whenever I travel, my reliable workhorse.
2. MX. Usually my back-up to the LX. Often the LX has colour film, the MX B&W. Partly because the MX was my second camera (I got it in 1993 although that one was stolen in Paris) and I am very familiar with it.
3. KX. I like it, but it is bigger than the others and I don't like the way the wind-on lever pokes in my eye.
4. K2DMD Only last because I have never used one so cannot comment!

Although I have a number of film cameras these days, the LX/MX combo is the one I usually take travelling and see the most use. Having said that, for my last trip to Denver/Ogallala I took my ES/ESII combo. I'm planning to get a CLA for my S1a so I can have a SV/S1a combination too. I tend to think of film cameras in pairs!

Luckily, it doesn't really matter. Use the cameras you like and have fun.

K.

[magkelly]

I don't know why people cite the LX working without batteries as a feature, what the hell would you do with an LX with the light meter out anyways, calculate sunny 16 before every shot?

Actually meters for older cameras can be somewhat unreliable anyhow. Unless the camera has been teched and is in pristine condition I always use a hand held meter than I know that works as well as the meter in the camera when I am shooting with an older SLR. But yeah, Sunny rule works fine a lot of the time and you do it it almost without thinking once you're used to using it. SP/SPII batteries can't be had easily here. I have to either take a long car trip or order them online to get them. I've run out from time to time but didn't want to not use my Spotties while waiting. Using the rule and or a hand held made the in camera meter being out no big thing.

[builttospill]

I like the preferred lists. Here's mine:

1. MX. I love the lightweight, although not always easy to switch shutter speeds. I love the LED metering.
2. K2 DMD. I love the exposure memory and MLU. I love the bulk and solid feel. I'm not a fan of match-needle, it's much quicker for me with center-needle or LED in MX.
3. LX. The FC-1/FB-1 VF is unbeatable. Best meter to this day. I hate the sticky-mirror syndrome.
- KX. The only K body I've never used. I think I'd like it except the match-needle metering.

[stevebrot]

Actually meters for older cameras can be somewhat unreliable anyhow.

Depends on the camera. With the exception of my old Yashica Lynx rangefinders, all of my metered cameras work as well as they did when new and for most of them, that means as good or better than my K10D. An LX with a working meter should be anything BUT unreliable.


Steve