[Jimfear]

Following recent developments, I can get either a CLA'd KX or a a more expensive MX, which is a better option? The MX has a bigger and brighter viewfinder or so I believe, but is the KX's good?

Short answer, Yes the KX's is good.

The viewfinder is darker in the KX but in daylight it's hardly noticeable. I would say that the match needle metering in the KX is much better than the LEDs in the MX.

I own both and will not part with either of them. Both are wonderful, you just have to try them both and see which one YOU like more. As said before, you're not going to be disappointed with either of them.

[Lowell Goudge]

The two main quirks I can think of are its metering and how the MX does mirror lockup.

The MX meters with five LEDs: 1 or more EV under, 1/2 under, at indicated exposure, 1/2 over, 1 or more EV over. Mostly it's just a matter of preference of LEDs compared to needles.

For mirror lockup you flick the shutter button just right. No joke. I never tried it myself, though.

You might also consider a KX (essentially a larger MX with needle metering and more accessible MLU) or an ME Super as your first film body. Really you can't go wrong with any of the four that have been mentioned (MX, K1000, KX, ME Super.)

I know nothing about mail-in film processors, but I would like to know more as well...

Steve

I would agree on the KX, over the MX

My reason is size, the MX is simply too small for me, althoug perhaps a better camera than the KX I like the size of the KX It is a true tank.

One important point however is the KX has a cloth horizontal shutter, I think the MX is vertical metal shutter. The cloth shutter is not the best for flash sync (1/60)

As another option, and one that looks and feels just like the KX is a ricoh XR2s, that was my first body (bought a used KX as second body and back up)

The XR2s has a metal shutter with 1/125 flash sync, can accept a 2.2 FPF winder, and has auto exposure (apature priority) as well as manual.

Aside from auto exposure, and the color of the matched needle metering (one blue one green) the XR2s and KX look the same in the viewfinder.

One nice feature ricoh had was a diagonal split image. Great for focusing since most subjects have either vertical or horizontal lines.

My KX has a ground glass viewing screen, I have seen others with horizontal split image, I don't know how this option was specified.

[Ratmagiclady]

I shot with someone's Ricoh, once, ...that diagonal split screen was really a nice touch. I actually like full microprism a lot, with a faster lens, anyway: the split image part can be sort of fussy to me, whereas the microprism sort of bangs into focus.

[edl]

Following recent developments, I can get either a CLA'd KX or a a more expensive MX, which is a better option? The MX has a bigger and brighter viewfinder or so I believe, but is the KX's good?

I own both, between the two I would recommend the KX. It's slightly larger and fits my hands better, and I like the needle metering system over the LED system in the MX. Also a CLA pretty much guarantees it'll work right.

Oh, and get a black body if you can, they help you take better pictures

[Ratmagiclady]

I own both, between the two I would recommend the KX. It's slightly larger and fits my hands better, and I like the needle metering system over the LED system in the MX. Also a CLA pretty much guarantees it'll work right.

Oh, and get a black body if you can, they help you take better pictures

I'd tend to go with the KX just on the CLA'ed factor, though I don't mind small bodies and LED's, as long as there's information in the latter, (simple +, minus, or green is rather annoying.) I got used to a Canon AE-1 Program's lighted-numbers scale over the years, getting by the lack of precision with a bit of a 'waggle' I developed that'd actually let me meter a whole scene just by where the lit up numbers *were* in my peripheral vision. I picked up an A-1 recently and the then-cool red-letters display makes me go, 'This goes a couple EVs lower, but... Darn, I have to *read* this.'