[UncleVanya]

Ironically the best shutterspeed control I had on a manual focus camera was in the Nikon Nikkormat FT3 which was a ring on the lens mount. It wasn't a popular choice, but I liked it.

[abruzzi]

It wasn't a popular choice, but I liked it.

To put it mildly. A lot of people really hate it. On my FTN it doesn't turn as easily as an aperture ring but it still works pretty well.

Personally, I don't mind strange layouts for controls. I got back into film to force the process to slow down, so I really don't want a system that I can control while looking through the viewfinder. I actually love the setup on the Kodak Retina III--match needle on top of the camera gives you an EV number, set the EV on the bottom of the lens, now shutter and aperture are paired, turning the ring always selects a shutter aperture pair that match that EV number.

[gofour3]

The biggest problem with Pentax auto-exposure cameras is the lack of exposure lock on most of them - the only manual focus bodies having it are the P30, P50 & MZ-M.

P30n? MZ-S?

The K2DMD also had exposure lock, but the K2 did not.

Phil.

[stevebrot]

The K2DMD also had exposure lock, but the K2 did not.

Phil.

Yep...It is anyone's guess why it was missing on the exposure automated M and A-series bodies. I believe AE lock was pretty much the norm from then on.


Steve

[stevebrot]

Ironically the best shutterspeed control I had on a manual focus camera was in the Nikon Nikkormat FT3 which was a ring on the lens mount. It wasn't a popular choice, but I liked it.

The best I've had, other than that on the Ricoh XR7, was on my first SLR, a Ricoh Singlex TLS. To accommodate the native linkage for the Copal metal shutter, the dial was on the front of the camera, a location that allowed two-finger (middle-third combo) operation that is surprisingly easy, even on my ~50 year-old copy of that model.


Steve

(...actually, the nicest shutter dial I have used is on the Canon P, a camera where it is unlikely the user would be adjusting "on the fly"...)

[UncleVanya]

The best I've had, other than that on the Ricoh XR7, was on my first SLR, a Ricoh Singlex TLS. To accommodate the native linkage for the Copal metal shutter, the dial was on the front of the camera, a location that allowed two-finger (middle-third combo) operation that is surprisingly easy, even on my ~50 year-old copy of that model.


Steve

(...actually, the nicest shutter dial I have used is on the Canon P, a camera where it is unlikely the user would be adjusting "on the fly"...)

Don't get me wrong - I like the DSLR style dual conrol wheel model. I love my PZ-1 for that. But in the non-electronic wizardry world - the shutter on the lens mount was pretty useful.

[stevebrot]

Don't get me wrong - I like the DSLR style dual conrol wheel model. I love my PZ-1 for that. But in the non-electronic wizardry world - the shutter on the lens mount was pretty useful.

What they said ^ ^ ^

I also quite like the e-dial approach.


Steve

[TwoUptons]

I actually love the setup on the Kodak Retina III--match needle on top of the camera gives you an EV number, set the EV on the bottom of the lens, now shutter and aperture are paired, turning the ring always selects a shutter aperture pair that match that EV number.

That depends entirely on the size of your 'c'... some of us have Retinas without meters

It drives me up the wall... 'why can't I change my aperture by itself?!' before remembering to push the tiny lever...

My old Hasselblad was like that, too, and I also hated it there

Otherwise, it's like an old-school version of shutter/aperture priority. You set the one you want, and the camera (well, you, really) sets the other one at the same time...

-Eric

[abruzzi]

I can imagine, if a Retina II has the same ev system, it could be very annoying unless you have a light meter that will also give you an ev number. On the IIIC (big C) since the EV setting pairs all the aperture/shutter combinations correctly expose the light.then when you twist the ring, it doesn't matter, anywhere you stop is correct exposure. One direction is for shallow depth of field and stopping motion, the other is for big depth of field and blurred motion. Its quite nice.

[tonyzoc]

The ME Super and ME F don't have that feature. Also, I agree with you on the Super Program. For most people shooting film, I think the program feature is a useless novelty. Most of us who shoot film have come to a point in our pursuit of the hobby where we think more about what goes into the exposure of each frame. We know how aperture and shutter speed will impact the look of the photo, so we want to have control over each one. Program mode offers no creative control over depth of field or motion in the picture. I have the ME Super, ME, ME F, Super Program, and Super A, so I feel qualified to offer my comparative opinion on them all when I say that the drawbacks of the exceptionally poor display in the Super Program/Super A viewfinder really kills the desireability of these cameras in contrast to the ME series, which all have lovely displays of shutter speed and exposure info. No, they don't tell you the aperture, but neither do the Super Program models. I would never consider the Super Program over the ME Super/ME F just to gain the very limited usefulness of program mode.

I think the main advantage if the Super Program/A is the OTF flash. Also, the Motor A (3.5 fps) does have a detachable battery you can cable and keep warm ... So does the MX Motor M. I would agree with most of the complaints about the Super Programs view finder... Actually I bought a ZX-5 back in the 90s when they were new. It had everything the Super Program had plus auto wind and load...though build quality was not as good. I liked it though.

[RKKS08]

I actually love the setup on the Kodak Retina III--match needle on top of the camera gives you an EV number, set the EV on the bottom of the lens, now shutter and aperture are paired, turning the ring always selects a shutter aperture pair that match that EV number.

There were several German cameras with the same system.

When using an external lightmeter, this made a lot of sense. Many of them showed directly the EV value, only after turning a wheel of moving a slider you could see the exposure time/aperture values fitting to this EV. This step was now moved from the light meter to the camera.

---------- Post added 05-09-18 at 17:45 ----------

Once again about the Super A/Super Program:
I liked the LCD display in the viewfinder - when it was new.

But the monochrome LCD displays of that generation were fast loosing contrast, so you will not find any existing Super A where it is even near to what it was when the camera was new. And also the illumination will now be only very dim, which it once wasn't.

I remember Canon recommended to to get the LCD in the viewfinder of their first professional flagship with this technology replaced about every 6 years. I dont know much about Canon SLRs, but this was reported in German photo magazines.

[Lord Lucan]

I love my Pentax KX cameras ... perfect size and weight .... My problem with the K2 was probably partly the ASA dial, but also the size of the camera.

K2 too big? It’s smaller (certainly in shoulder height) than the KX and KM

I don't know where you guys are geting your info, but according to the Pentax brochure of the time they are virtually the same in dimensions and almost so in weight. The whole K series look to me as if they were built on the same chassis. See pages 9 and 13 :-

http://www.kye.me.uk/photography/K_brochure.pdf

[bjolester]

From PF manual focus slr reviews: Pentax Manual Focus Film SLRs - Pentax Pentax Film Cameras - Pentax Camera Reviews and Specifications

Pentax KX dimensions: (W x H x D) 143 x 91.5 x 52.5 mm

Pentax K2 dimensions: (W x H x D) 144 x 92 x 57 mm

The dimensions of the KX and K2 are different, and these cameras are not built on the same chassis.

Furthermore, I base my views on these two cameras on empirical data: I have owned and used both cameras.

[LesDMess]

From PF manual focus slr reviews: Pentax Manual Focus Film SLRs - Pentax Pentax Film Cameras - Pentax Camera Reviews and Specifications

As you pointed out, strictly on dimensions you would think they're essentially the same size but they're not when viewed side by side.

[stevebrot]

The whole K series look to me as if they were built on the same chassis. See pages 9 and 13 :-

Similar, but not identical. Viewfinder specs are different too between the models. The same is true for many external parts.

As you pointed out, strictly on dimensions you would think they're essentially the same size but they're not when viewed side by side.

What the official numbers does not show is that the bottom plate to top-deck distance on the K2 is quite a bit less than the other two cameras and other subtle differences. A big surprise is the image of the focus screen on the K2 vs. the other two. The K2 has a much larger screen and probably does not share prisms or ocular lens with the other two, if indeed they share viewfinder components between them at all.


Steve