Originally posted by stevebrot Ha! Ha! I also own both cameras and consider the XR-2s to be more rugged (it resists dents and scratches better). Either way, they are both great cameras and the similarity of control layout and viewfinder is simply spooky. The cameras are virtual twins except that the Ricoh is a little lighter. Here are the twin sons of different mothers side by side mounted to 200mm teles:
K10D, XR Rikenon 50/2
Steve
funny, really funny
I cant match the twin 200's you have on the front, but...... what about a pair of 50F2's one pentax on XR Rikenon?
actually the XR-2s was my first camera bought new in 1981. I picked up the KX a year lager when looking for a second body (wanted to shoot ektachrome 400 as well as kodachrome 64 without back winding film) and wanted a ground glass only focusing screen so I coulf use my 400F5.6 without split image black out. The KX was made with different screens and it was easy in 1982 to get one cheap as the MX was already out.
What I don't like about the ricoh, when you say it is tougher, I am not so sure, mine has a problem of intermittant power contact due to distortion of the camera body when long heavy lenses are hung on the camera and supported by the body tripod mount. My big fat lens was the series 1 70-210F3.5 version 1 at 1 kilo.
I never was really able to get consistent power contact, without modification becaus epower to the camera base was a spring contact internally. I ultimately soldered it perminantly.
Camera still works, but has not been used, other than to trip the shutter occasionally in about 6 years. ALso have the motor winder for it.
While I can't complain about either body, if I go out today and shoot film, it is with my PZ-1. In fact, did 2 rolls a week or so ago, thinking about doing a wedding in B&W film just for the hell of it.
p.s. did you ever figure out why one camera has a green needle and the other a blue one?