Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-03-2013, 10:06 AM   #31
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Syracuse, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,464
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
I'm also looking at ZX-5/ZX-5n as their price seems to be very nice and they should be more reliable than the ZX-5n, I think?
AFAIK the only ZX/MZ camera that didn't have a plastic gear was the MZ-S.

10-03-2013, 10:39 AM   #32
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,895
Original Poster
So I guess I have to decide between a very reliable camera, or an affordable one... the MZ-S seems like a dream camera, but I don't have 400 dollars to spend on one. I'm not that serious about it... my plan is to shoot about a roll or two of film a month, tops, and have my DSLR be the workhorse for day to day stuff.

I think the ZX-M will be a stop gap camera, along the Minolta, until I find the one permanent Pentax camera I will then keep. How is the reliability of the Z1/Z1p?

Maybe I should just go with an old manual like the KX or MX.

Or, get a ZX-5 and change the plastic gear for the metal one?
10-03-2013, 11:05 AM   #33
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,901
Nothing against the K1000. It's a darn good camera. They can be found in near mint condition too, often for a lot less, but still I'd take my KX's and my SPII's over them any day. I won't touch an ME Super or anything after say 1976 that isn't a K1000 till they went DSLR. I loathe the LX, the A series and the P series cameras with a passion. Ugly, ugly, ugly, all of them and I don't care how well they work. I won't be seen with one of them in my bag. :P The small size is nice but I don't like the top buttons on the ME much and I've never actually seen a working one. I think I've inherited about six of them at this point so that doesn't really reassure me as to their quality. I have 3 K1000's actually and all of them look to be functional though I haven't actually tested them all out to find out. I never got to using them much. I think I used the first one a bit but then I got my KX's and I haven't looked back. As far as K mount film cameras go that one is the bomb and I just love it. I can't seem to put mine down long enough to shoot with much else film-wise except occasionally my beloved SPII's. I'd suggest one but KX's can be pricey, particularly in black. The K1000's are much easier to acquire for a lot less. If money is an issue I'd suggest doing that. You can actually buy one near mint and not spend a whole lot.
10-03-2013, 11:36 AM   #34
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,895
Original Poster
Well, you should leave one of your K1000s with me, I'll make sure it stays working if you ever want it back

I don't agree the post-1976 cameras are all ugly. The ME and ME Super look pretty much like the other Pentaxes from the 70s, except for the lack of shutter speed dial.
But yeah I gave up on the ME Super I found locally. I contacted the guy and almost picked it up for 35 dollars including 2 lenses I had no use for.... but could probably sell both on Ebay for 20-30 dollars (the 50 f2 should pick up 15-20 dollars, right?). Still, decided not to go for it.

So, the Z1/Z1P. How is it reliability-wise? As good as the MZ-S? It seems like I might be able to afford one.

10-03-2013, 11:55 AM   #35
Pentaxian
titrisol's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: In the most populated state... state of denial
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,848
The MZ series tend to have a weak link in the film transport gear
The PZ-1p was the flagship in the mid 90s, it should be a good camera
10-03-2013, 04:39 PM   #36
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,895
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by LesDMess Quote
I believe the proper phrase is "Leica glow" which is the unquantifiable characteristic that is used to overpay for the brand . . .

Although Minolta and Leica did collaborate on a few camera models such as the Minolta XE-7/Lecia R3 and the Minolta XD-11/Leica R6 and possibly others.
Minolta actually built lenses for Leica in the 70s. The Summicron 40mm f2, for example, was made by Minolta and is very well regarded.\

But yeah I'm trying to avoid the Leica glow and to some extent the Canikon glow as well. Old film Canons aren't bad in terms of price, but old Nikons still go for way too much money for what they are. I feel Pentax and Minolta offer much better value. And to an enthusiast like me, value is key
10-03-2013, 05:08 PM   #37
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Rockaway Beach NYC
Posts: 7,682
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
Well as far as I know the Minolta plastic gears don't have a history of breaking down.
The Minolta gears don't crack like the Pentax, but they are known to skip a tooth.
This will render the camera nonfunctional, as timing is everything in the operation of an SLR.

All Pentax ZX/MZ models except the MZ-S came from the factory with the plastic gear.

As mentioned previously Leitz and Minolta once shared camera design technology.
However none but a few M-mount rangefinder lenses are the same.

Regarding quality of various lens manufacturers my advice is don't believe everything you read.

Chris

10-03-2013, 05:13 PM   #38
Senior Member
rt22306's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 164
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
As an update.... my friend is sending me the ZX-M sans lens (to make shipping as cheap as possible... and I don't need a 50 F2). I decided not to go with the ME Super (which is still on Craigslist) because the ZX-M is newer, basically, and basically a gift.

In the meantime I bought a Minolta XG-M with 2 MD Rokkor-X 50mm lenses (including an F1.4, yay, and a F1.7) and a Focal 28mm 2.8 and a Sigma 75-250 f4-5, for cheap on Craigslist. It also came with a neat 52mm Sigma Achromatic Lens that I can use on that Sigma, and also on Pentax lenses like my A 135mm 2.8. It works well but I haven't done an evaluation on image quality yet.
The Minolta was cheap because it doesn't come with batteries. I'm still waiting on them to see if the camera works. It's in absolute top notch shape though - just a beautifully kept and great handling camera. From my reading, if the foam is good (it's still ok) the only thing that can go wrong is some capacitors that can dry up, but someone on the Auction site sells a kit for 5 dollars that has the capacitors to change, and instructions on doing so.
The camera even came with some slide film expired in 1991...
I enjoy my XG-M; I have an XD-11 also (I had it serviced, etc. after getting it; but it's not been put to work yet...soon though!), and am eyeing the XG-9. The Minoltas seem to have been overlooked; prices are low and it seems quite a few -11s are on the market. The XD series (from what I read on The Rokkor Files site) is the more desireable of the two.
10-03-2013, 05:50 PM   #39
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
The PZ-1, PZ-1p/Z-1, Z-1p are very good cameras, with some better specs than any modern Pentax DSLR (flash sync speed for example). The downside to these bodies is the battery is expensive and they don't last as long as the batteries powering the meters in older cameras such as the K1000. When I bought my *ist film camera, I made sure to get the grip with it so I can use common AA batteries in it to power the camera instead of the expensive one for the body. Some cameras offer accessories like this, some don't. I don't think there is a AA grip for the PZ-1/Z-1 bodies.

I think it was mentioned on the first page, but if not, older film cameras retain their value very well. Buy a few older cameras and compare. If you don't like one sell it for the price you purchased it. If you like a couple, keep them and use them all. Replace the gear with a metal one in your ZX-M and you'll have a nice camera for years. If you can replace the capacitors in another camera, I'm assuming you're handy enough to pick up the gear and do it yourself too.

The important thing is to pick a camera that meets your needs and feels good in your hands. Do you want manual- or auto-focus? When you say you want a reliable camera, will it come off the shelf for occasional shots at the park, or will you take it on hikes and trips where it will get a few bumps along the way?
10-04-2013, 07:54 AM   #40
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,895
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ChrisPlatt Quote
Regarding quality of various lens manufacturers my advice is don't believe everything you read.

Chris
That is why I got me a cheap yet nice Minolta with a 50 1.4 lens - to see for myself

QuoteOriginally posted by rt22306 Quote
I enjoy my XG-M; I have an XD-11 also (I had it serviced, etc. after getting it; but it's not been put to work yet...soon though!), and am eyeing the XG-9. The Minoltas seem to have been overlooked; prices are low and it seems quite a few -11s are on the market. The XD series (from what I read on The Rokkor Files site) is the more desireable of the two.
Why would you want the XG-9 if you have the XG-M which is supposed to be the best XG camera? Why not get an SRT-102 instead, or an X-700?

QuoteOriginally posted by builttospill Quote
The PZ-1, PZ-1p/Z-1, Z-1p are very good cameras, with some better specs than any modern Pentax DSLR (flash sync speed for example). The downside to these bodies is the battery is expensive and they don't last as long as the batteries powering the meters in older cameras such as the K1000. When I bought my *ist film camera, I made sure to get the grip with it so I can use common AA batteries in it to power the camera instead of the expensive one for the body. Some cameras offer accessories like this, some don't. I don't think there is a AA grip for the PZ-1/Z-1 bodies.

I think it was mentioned on the first page, but if not, older film cameras retain their value very well. Buy a few older cameras and compare. If you don't like one sell it for the price you purchased it. If you like a couple, keep them and use them all. Replace the gear with a metal one in your ZX-M and you'll have a nice camera for years. If you can replace the capacitors in another camera, I'm assuming you're handy enough to pick up the gear and do it yourself too.

The important thing is to pick a camera that meets your needs and feels good in your hands. Do you want manual- or auto-focus? When you say you want a reliable camera, will it come off the shelf for occasional shots at the park, or will you take it on hikes and trips where it will get a few bumps along the way?
Thank you. The PZ-1 has a grip but it's for handling only - no batteries! What was Pentax thinking with that one... I guess they thought it someone can buy a camera as nice and pricey as the PZ-1 was when it came out, they could afford the batteries... and speaking of the PZ-1, there is one on Ebay for a very affordable price, but the description does not say it has been tested and is workin - just that it was taken out of storage and worked previously. I e-mailed the seller and didn't get any answers, so that's it for that one. The specs do look impressive though, and it seems like it could make me sell my digital and spend the money on film instead, and be happier that way!

I might look into the metal gears for the ZX-M if I like it. The battery grip also - I love being able to use AA batteries. Maybe my search for the Pentax film camera will end with a metal-geared ZX-M and a battery grip! I think having two film cameras and one digital is fine, I'm not a collector...

And by reliable I mean something that I can take out every once in a while to the park, as you said, and it won't break down on me while I'm attempting to use it, like the A3000 did - and I know that's a very real risk with some of these 30-40 year old cameras. In another thread I mentioned I gave a chance to a point-and-shoot Ricoh for a couple bucks, because I researched it and it has a nice Tessar-design 38mm 2.8 lens . But that one's dead too, and is just on my work desk for its looks now.

I really baby my stuff so I'm not concerned with how it stands up to abuse, just regular normal use.
10-04-2013, 08:12 AM   #41
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,446
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
Minolta actually built lenses for Leica in the 70s. The Summicron 40mm f2, for example, was made by Minolta and is very well regarded.
There's a lot of mis-information about the Leitz-Minolta cooperation back then. The 40 Summicron was only made by Leitz for the Leica CL, while Minolta made all the CL camera bodies (deigned by Leitz - but production shifted to Minolta to lower costs after they formed the agreements). The 40mm Minolta lens was based on the same design, but made by Minolta using their glass. Leitz originally made the 90mm f4 lens for both the Leica CL and the Leitz-Minolta CL that Minolta sold, even though the Minolta lenses were branded Minolta - but were marked as made in Germany. Later, after Leitz dropped the CL and Minolta came out with the CLE Minolta made their own 90mm f4 lens, slightly different design than the one made by Leitz, and added a 28mm lens for the CLE. (Many of the 28mm CLE lenses now have element separation - buyer beware.)

For SLR lenses for the "R" body Leica cameras Minolta did make some lenses for Leitz, and Leitz used some Minolta designs but made their own versions in Germany, using their own glass. (For example the 24mm f2.8 was a Minolta design made by Leitz, but is often called a Minolta lens, making the used prices lower!) The Leica R zooms were primarily made by other companies, some by Minolta, who also made their 500mm mirror lens.
10-04-2013, 08:32 AM   #42
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,895
Original Poster
Well on the 40 f2, what is said is that the parts for the Leitz (including glass) were made by Minolta. We won't know for sure I guess, but Leica did drop that lens after only a few years while Minolta continued making their branded version for a lot longer.

Anyway, the point is not to say who is better and who is worse, but to say that all these manufacturers put out great lenses (and a few dogs here and there), and that the characteristics of the Minoltas of that vintage do have a resemblance to that Leitz "look" in the pictures that come out of them. I just love photography, if I had the money I'd buy cameras from all the big players and get some nice Zuiko, Nikon, Canon FD and other glass, and even some Leica and Zeiss stuff, to see what they are like.
10-04-2013, 09:34 AM   #43
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,446
Agreed! I've collected most of the major brands from the 1960s & 70s, including the Minolta SRT, and most of the "normal" 50mm lenses were very good. Back in the '60s I went from Pentax to Canon to Leica, and later to Pentax again when the MX came out. Leica are still my favorite (still use the ones I bought in the '60s), and the SV series are my favorite Pentax.
The 70s Leica lenses are still my main lenses on my M9 digital Leica, and Pentax -M on my K-5.
10-04-2013, 10:48 AM   #44
Senior Member
rt22306's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 164
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
That is why I got me a cheap yet nice Minolta with a 50 1.4 lens - to see for myself



Why would you want the XG-9 if you have the XG-M which is supposed to be the best XG camera? Why not get an SRT-102 instead, or an X-700?



Thank you. The PZ-1 has a grip but it's for handling only - no batteries! What was Pentax thinking with that one... I guess they thought it someone can buy a camera as nice and pricey as the PZ-1 was when it came out, they could afford the batteries... and speaking of the PZ-1, there is one on Ebay for a very affordable price, but the description does not say it has been tested and is workin - just that it was taken out of storage and worked previously. I e-mailed the seller and didn't get any answers, so that's it for that one. The specs do look impressive though, and it seems like it could make me sell my digital and spend the money on film instead, and be happier that way!

I might look into the metal gears for the ZX-M if I like it. The battery grip also - I love being able to use AA batteries. Maybe my search for the Pentax film camera will end with a metal-geared ZX-M and a battery grip! I think having two film cameras and one digital is fine, I'm not a collector...

And by reliable I mean something that I can take out every once in a while to the park, as you said, and it won't break down on me while I'm attempting to use it, like the A3000 did - and I know that's a very real risk with some of these 30-40 year old cameras. In another thread I mentioned I gave a chance to a point-and-shoot Ricoh for a couple bucks, because I researched it and it has a nice Tessar-design 38mm 2.8 lens . But that one's dead too, and is just on my work desk for its looks now.

I really baby my stuff so I'm not concerned with how it stands up to abuse, just regular normal use.
It's a long story about the want for an XG-9 (involves a young lady I met in April, 1981 who had one though...); but part of it also is that I sometimes post good items on Pbase. I think there are less than two dozen photos from the -9 there. Something of a crime to my mind. Less than 3 dozen from the XG-M. I want to do something to bump those numbers up just a touch.

I have a X-700 and also an SRT-101. The 101 is built like a tank.
10-04-2013, 02:58 PM   #45
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,895
Original Poster
So, I finally got around to getting some batteries and putting some film in the XG-M. So far everything seems to work fine!

I've decided that the KX is the one I'm going for, in the near future. Just a beautiful, compact camera, that works perfectly even if the batteries run out (it just needs them for the meter). And its light meter is supposed to be very reliable.
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!
a3000, bit, body, film, k1000, pentax 35mm, plastic, sale, zx-m
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best (Most Reliable) SD Card Henry Scott Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 16 06-21-2017 03:49 PM
Compatability of modern Pentax lenses on old (35mm film) Pentax bodies Origineelreclamebord Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 20 02-14-2013 10:44 AM
New 35mm sensor from kodak, will we see it in pentax bodies? bunegg Pentax News and Rumors 36 11-23-2010 08:52 AM
Most reliable fast SDHC card 8GB+? Daemos Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 13 10-13-2009 05:54 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:25 AM. | 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