[Paul Ewins]

A long awaited acquisition: the MX Medical. Unlike it's successors, the MF and MF-1, it is just a regular MX with a special focussing screen (M1) designed for use with endoscopes. As such it was almost impossible to search for on eBay, until this one came along with the endoscope adapters. Even then it was a bit of a gamble that it would have the M1 screen that marks it out as the MX Medical.







You can clearly see the bulge on the focussing screen for use with the endoscope. Strangely you can still attach a regular lens and focus it, although the image in the viewfinder now has a circular crop, so I'm not really sure what the bulge achieves.

[MarkJerling]

What a cool find! Thanks for posting.

[garywakeling]

Have you any idea why it is connected in to the X sync? Does it have some sort of shutter mechanism in the endoscope adapter? Interesting find for sure, well done.

[ProfessorBuzz]

Wouldn't the bulge be for magnification?

[Scanogram]

Very nice. Never seen that on the MX. I was given this Olympus by a friend in the biomed shop at one of the hospitals I service.

[Paul Ewins]

I checked the MF and MF-1 bodies I own and they both have a similar cable connection into the X synch port. Maybe it fires an internal strobe in the endoscope unit. What I did just notice is that the MF and MF-1 also have ports for FP synch which none of the other M series bodies (apart from the MX) have. I thought that they were stripped down versions of the MG, but seem to be something different again.

Magnification seems the obvious answer to the focussing screen, but why make a special screen when you could just use a magnifier or ref-converter? I suppose it might just be that it is a low power like 1.2x or 1.3x that was easy enough to do on a moulded plastic screen instead of reworking a flip up magnifier to a lower magnification.

[Baard-Einar]

Cool find! The "Only" adaption of the camera body is the focusing screen, unlike the MF and MF-1 which have other adoptions as well. Is that correct?

[Paul Ewins]

Correct. The MF and MF-1 are probably closer to the ME in features, but are different enough to be their own thing. The most noticeable thing is the little hump on the prism where the hot shoe normally sits but as you can see from the top view the shutter speeds and exposure compensation are both different. As mentioned before they both have FP synch sockets. I have one MF with the databack pins and one without, so I don't know whether that was an option or a newer/later version. The MF is half frame, while the MF-1 is full frame and of course they have the same hump in the focussing screen as the MX Medical. And since the MF is half frame the frame counter has a 0 . 4 . 8 . 12 . sequence up to 72 instead of the usual 0 . 2 . 4 . 6 . - 36 sequence. 0, 40, 48 and 72 are marked in orange instead of the usual 0, 20, 24 and 36.

[womble]

The ABCD abcd on the exposure compensation is curious. Is it still just half stops either way?

[Paul Ewins]

I didn't get a manual, only the box, so I'm in the dark as to what the ABCD abcd does.

[MilkaSchokoHase87]

I have taken shots with the MF-1 in all Modes (ABCD....) And all Pictures turned out the same. So I think it has to do with any light control inside the endoscopy tool.

[asaru]

Around 1981 or 1982 I needed to have a dental procedure done. I remember being hooked up to a rather large contraption that fitted over my mouth. At the very back was a Pentax MX. I noticed that because the previous summer I got one as well but was still paying off the loan 25 dollars a month.

I wonder if it was this same version....