[ravenorxs]

I've been shooting digital for about 2 years now. On a whim, I found out that tomorrow Vancouver is having an annual camera show/swap meet.

There is the potential for me to score a relatively cheap film SLR camera.

I had no intention of doing this but given the opportunity I would like to grab a film SLR to experiment/play with.

I've heard good things about the K1000 and the MX. The K1000 being one of the most sturdy/reliable bodies ever made.

The MX, while not as solidly built (in terms of simplicity and longevity) is much better compared to the K1000 in terms of functionality (self-timer, DoF preview etc).

If I can find a used one with lens for a fairly cheap price (sub 100 or even 50 CAD I'm assuming), which one would you guys recommend?

I've already seen some 'getting started/how-to' videos for the K1000 and it seems fairly easy to use. Don't know much about the workings of the MX.

Ninja edit: A bit blasphemous, but I found a local craigslist posting for a Canon AE-1 with a 50mm kit lens for 30 CAD. Thoughts?

[Eyewanders]

MX... no question.

I had the K1000 for many, many years and largely kept it out of nostalgia and simply because it's a legend in its own right. But day to day shooting, from a carry around and use perspective, I'd pick the MX every single time. That's why I now own three MXs and finally (though reluctantly) sold my old K1000. I'm not sure the MX is much less solidly built to be honest - it's a tiny little tank. Maybe slightly, sure, but a CLA will buy you 10-20 years easily.

---------- Post added 04-26-14 at 09:53 AM ----------

Here ya go - a *black* one with lens for a hundred bucks? Buy this now.
Pentax MX

[ravenorxs]

MX... no question.

I had the K1000 for many, many years and largely kept it out of nostalgia and simply because it's a legend in its own right. But day to day shooting, from a carry around and use perspective, I'd pick the MX every single time. That's why I now own three MXs and finally (though reluctantly) sold my old K1000. I'm not sure the MX is much less solidly built to be honest - it's a tiny little tank. Maybe slightly, sure, but a CLA will buy you 10-20 years easily.

---------- Post added 04-26-14 at 09:53 AM ----------

Here ya go - a *black* one with lens for a hundred bucks? Buy this now.
Pentax MX

That makes sense. I'm hoping I'll be able to find one in good condition.

Do you know what sort of adapter is need for the K1000 or MX to use my modern DSLR lenses?

[builttospill]

I'd get both. Wait, I already have both. I use my MX more often than my K1000s though.

The black one for $100 looks like a good deal. You don't need an adapter to use lenses interchangeably on either film or DSLR camera. Keep in mind you'll need an aperture ring on the lens though to adjust aperture on the MX or K1000.

[ravenorxs]

I'd get both. Wait, I already have both. I use my MX more often than my K1000s though.

The black one for $100 looks like a good deal. You don't need an adapter to use lenses interchangeably on either film or DSLR camera. Keep in mind you'll need an aperture ring on the lens though to adjust aperture on the MX or K1000.

I think I'll be on the lookout for the MX more.

I actually have the FA 77, FA 50 1.4 and a recently bought used Sigma 24mm superwide MF. These all have aperture rings on them so I should be good.

I never realized an adapter wasn't necessary. That's pretty awesome. I think I'll disregard that Canon AE-1 then.

[OregonJim]

Either one will be a blast. I still have (and use) the K1000 that I purchased new in 1976 for $150. It has never failed me!

[ravenorxs]

Hmmm not to compound the issue, but I took at look at the full list of manual focus cameras in PF's database:

Pentax Manual Focus Film SLRs - Pentax Pentax Film Cameras - Pentax Camera Reviews and Specifications

and I did some quick ebay price checks for a few of the other highly rated ones. Most if not all can be bought used for under 100.

Given this, are the K1000/MX stil preferred choices if a new model (1980's manufactured) MF focus is available?

Camera's like the Super A/P3N/MZ-M seem just as cheap (if not cheaper) and look mostly in better condition as they are about a decade newer.

[filoxophy]

Just get the MX.

[ElJamoquio]

Mx. Mx. Mx.

[grhazelton]

A no-brainer. I own both. The K1000 is a beginner's camera. The MX is a system camera: Interchangeable viewing screens, a fairly available winder (watch the battery door screw!) a rarely available motor, a bulk film back, for heaven's sake! shutter speed/aperture readout in viewfinder, center weighted meter rather than the bottom weighted meter of the K1000, depth of field preview.... The MX will carry you a long way, until you meet the LX....

BTW, if you see the KX it would also be a fine choice over the K1000.

---------- Post added 04-26-14 at 04:01 PM ----------

I think I'll be on the lookout for the MX more.

I actually have the FA 77, FA 50 1.4 and a recently bought used Sigma 24mm superwide MF. These all have aperture rings on them so I should be good.

I never realized an adapter wasn't necessary. That's pretty awesome. I think I'll disregard that Canon AE-1 then.

Pluuze! A Canon AE-1? All those electronics to fail and the old FD mount to boot? Do not wander from the Sacred Pentax Path, Grasshopper!

[gofour3]

I'd go with the KX over both the K1000 or MX, it's a better camera. You should be able to find one at the camera show as well. I found a mint black CLAed K2 a few years back at the spring Vancouver swap meet.

Phil.

[ChrisPlatt]

For learning the basics of film photography I'd recommend the K1000 over the MX.
Better yet would be a KM, if you can find one...

Chris

[Vendee]

I have both but use the MX a lot more often.

[ElJamoquio]

For learning the basics of film photography I'd recommend the K1000 over the MX.
Better yet would be a KM, if you can find one...

Chris

Why is that?

[adpo]

I love the MX, its wonderfully well built, incredibly light in stock form and simply a pleasure to shoot with. Best part is that massive viewfinder its got