Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-08-2012, 07:09 PM   #1
Site Supporter
mattt's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Niagara
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,806
ME Super the one?

I've been playing with K1000 now for several rolls and I'm quite enjoying the manual shooting. When I started looking at the M bodies because of their diminutive size, I found out that they were fairly automated. Is ME Super the one that I get the benefit of the small size, but can shoot like my K1000? I've started the hunt for a black one and a 40mm pancake to stuff in my pocket.

07-08-2012, 07:27 PM   #2
Pentaxian
tromboads's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Melbs
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,148
yep

The me super has an auto mode, you set the ap and it will work out the light. or the manual mode is still there for you to click between.

Honestly. I find the me super nearly a little too small :P and as a result, nearly always left it in auto and just adjusted it when shooting with strong back light etc etc etc.

The K1000 is larger and as a result I feel its much nicer to use. Admittedly a little annoying that I was always taking the cap on and off as I was worried about draining the light meter battery :P

Having said that, I still do love the little Me Super :P
07-08-2012, 07:45 PM   #3
Site Supporter
kiwi_jono's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,082
I can't comment about comparison with K-1000 but I just recently started shooting with a ME Super (my other main camera is a K-x DSLR) . I got the camera with a nice M50 f1.4 lens that I wanted and I have to say I am impressed.
I wish the K-x had such a nice viewfinder and size is just right for me.
07-08-2012, 08:05 PM - 1 Like   #4
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,994
The MX will be the most like shooting with your K1000.

07-08-2012, 08:24 PM   #5
Forum Member
clem's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Southern New Mexico
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 67
I own the K1000, ME and ME Super. The 3 lenses I use most often are all M series. 50mm, 28mm, 50mm macro. I enjoy setting the f-stop and letting the camera choose the speed on either the ME or ME Super (they are the same size) but I don't know of any lens that would make it fit in my pocket. It is small but not THAT small.

Before the Pentax, I had a Canon FTb which had spot meter (like the F-1) and depth of field preview. I hate to say this but I would choose the Canon over the Pentax K1000 every time.
07-08-2012, 08:41 PM   #6
Site Supporter
Sluggo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ames, Iowa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 601
Swift1 is correct. The MX operates a lot like a smaller, quieter K1000 - the meter is intuitively similar although it works by LEDs instead of a needle. ME Super does have a usable metered manual mode but it's designed more for auto exposure.
07-08-2012, 08:50 PM   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,044
QuoteOriginally posted by clem Quote
I own the K1000, ME and ME Super. The 3 lenses I use most often are all M series. 50mm, 28mm, 50mm macro. I enjoy setting the f-stop and letting the camera choose the speed on either the ME or ME Super (they are the same size) but I don't know of any lens that would make it fit in my pocket. It is small but not THAT small.

Before the Pentax, I had a Canon FTb which had spot meter (like the F-1) and depth of field preview. I hate to say this but I would choose the Canon over the Pentax K1000 every time.
An ME Super with the Takumar 17mm fisheye fits in my jacket pocket and I understand the M 40mm f2.8 is equally small.



I think the FTB QL is a great camera and the QL is handy. Canon calls the 12% Meter coverage central area metering in the F-1 manual and semi spot meter in the FTB manual. In any case that is a very liberal interpretation of what is called a spot meter . . .

The K1000 is the least expensive of the K's and the FTB's features are certainly more inline with that of the KX. However FTB was released in 1971 and is setback by it's CDS meter and older battery requirements compared to the 1975 released KX.
07-09-2012, 07:27 AM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Kentucky
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,415
I think it is the closest. I own both. The super will do everything the 1000 will do. You just have to get used to the LEDS since there is no needle.

07-09-2012, 08:27 AM   #9
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,476
QuoteOriginally posted by LesDMess Quote
I think the FTB QL is a great camera and the QL is handy. Canon calls the 12% Meter coverage central area metering in the F-1 manual and semi spot meter in the FTB manual. In any case that is a very liberal interpretation of what is called a spot meter . . .

The K1000 is the least expensive of the K's and the FTB's features are certainly more inline with that of the KX. However FTB was released in 1971 and is setback by it's CDS meter and older battery requirements compared to the 1975 released KX.
Yeah, I do love the FT/FTb series : one of my favorite cameras ever, (and definitely, the selective area metering is just great for manual shooting: it's called a 'fat spot,' by some: the thing that really makes it like a spot meter isn't the size of the spot, it's that when you look through the finder, you'll see this greyish rectangle there and that's *exactly* what the meter's reading off of, and that area doesn't have any appreciable weighting within it: what this means is you can take an average in any proportion you can lay that rectangle across: it's a thing of beauty. It's not as compatible with auto exposure, though, so it went away with the auto exposure models.) The QL system I could take or leave, (It's not actually quicker if you're used to reloading conventionally on the fly,) but it's no gimmick: I've never seen one fail. (YOu also dont' really need to specify 'FTb QL: FTbs, TLs, etc, they're *all* QL, as are the Canonet G-III and suchlike. (There may have been an early version of the FT without it, but I'm not sure. )

Bit of a digression, there. They do make the K1000 seem quite stripped-down, though. Pity about the batteries being discontinued.

I'd agree the KX would be the nearest Pentax equivalent, that's probably why I'd have one, myself.
07-09-2012, 08:28 AM   #10
Veteran Member
DaveHolmes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,501
I have a couple of ME-supers... The MX sees a LOT more use... A much nicer camera to use...
07-09-2012, 08:57 AM   #11
Site Supporter
grhazelton's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jonesboro, GA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,829
I own a K1000, ME-Super, and MX. The ME is delightful to use, with a wonderful viewfinder, perhaps the best Pentax has ever done. But, and this is a big but, it has no depth of field preview. I don't understand this omission, surely the mechanical bits would have been easy to incorporate. The MX handles in a very similar fashion, and does have DOF preview, in addition it has interchangeable viewfinder screens, if you can find them. Being able to use the MX without battery power is a plus; the ME is pretty much dead in the water without a battery.

With both the ME and MX I prefer mounting the winders, although they are a bit noisy. But, course, they can be turned off. With the winders the cameras seem to fit my hands better, and vertical format shooting is much more comfortable. Both have center weighted metering.

I bought the MX to supplement the K1000, and I'm not sure I've used the K1000 since. No DOF preview, and no shut off switch!
07-09-2012, 09:11 AM   #12
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,476
QuoteOriginally posted by grhazelton Quote
I own a K1000, ME-Super, and MX. The ME is delightful to use, with a wonderful viewfinder, perhaps the best Pentax has ever done. But, and this is a big but, it has no depth of field preview. I don't understand this omission, surely the mechanical bits would have been easy to incorporate.
I think, in essence, this is because the ME Super is an ME with a couple of buttons for manual control, despite them being wonderful in lots of ways, they weren't actually originally designed around the MX-like market: it's more of an automated camera with an override than a manual camera that added aperrture priority.
07-09-2012, 09:16 AM   #13
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,044
That's cool that the state of Georgia is represented . . .

QuoteOriginally posted by grhazelton Quote
I bought the MX to supplement the K1000, and I'm not sure I've used the K1000 since. No DOF preview, and no shut off switch!
Everyone knows that for DOF preview on the K1000, you can set the aperture and unlock the lens as this will close it down . . .
07-09-2012, 10:53 AM   #14
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,149
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
(There may have been an early version of the FT without it, but I'm not sure. )
In late1966 I went from my H1a to a Canon FT, and it already had the QL system - and the FT only came out in March that year, so I think the FT was always Quick Load. I also had an FP body (non-metered) sharing lenses, and it was not QL. The Pellix came out a year before the FT without the QL feature, but it changed to QL when the FT came out.
I also loved the meter and general build of these cameras. The FL lenses had diaphragm ring at the front of the lens, like rangefinder lenses, which I believe is why they tended to get sluggish diaphragms due to the linkage design. I noticed on my 50 1.4 and 200 lenses back then that at fast shutter speeds and small apertures the diaphragm would not be fully closed at the right edge of the frame, so under these settings this part of the frame would be overexposed. The diaphragms would seem snappy open and closed when operated by hand, so you had to test for this carefully. That moved me from Canon to Leica back then.
A couple years ago I found a mint FT with the same lenses for under $40, and ... these lenses had the same problem. I did a full CLA on the body and lenses, and by removing the oils from the lens linkages and polishing them with dry lubes instead they now work as they should. The FL 50 1.4 (ver II) still seems to have better "snap" and contrast than the Takumar 50 1.4.
07-09-2012, 11:02 AM   #15
Site Supporter
mattt's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Niagara
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,806
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by grhazelton Quote
Being able to use the MX without battery power is a plus
That is the info I'm looking for - cheers guys, great little threat you've provided. Much appreaciated.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k1000, size
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Film camera Kits (Flsh, Body, Lens) ME Super, Super Plus, P3, SF1 jjdgti Sold Items 29 07-09-2012 06:28 PM
Wanted - Acquired: Good manual film body (prefer MX, ME Super, or Super Program-A) nms_photog Sold Items 2 06-01-2012 10:48 PM
For Sale - Sold: Six Pentax Film Bodies (Z-1, PZ-1, SF1n, P3n, Super Program, Super ME) dgaies Sold Items 5 06-23-2011 01:45 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax-A 50mm f1.7 and Super Program (Super A) body EXC. (Worldwide) cheekygeek Sold Items 7 05-10-2011 02:55 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:07 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top