Originally posted by craveone Still having a hard time deciding. I'd much rather get the LX, but I'm worried I'll have problems with it later down the road and it will become an expensive paper weight...
I'm not a fan of the pics I've seen online of the LED lights for metering on the MX, nor am I can of having to halfway press the shutter to initiate metering. I used back button focus on my DSLR, half pressing always leads to me pressing completely when trying to move my thumbs to meter
@Craveone, these sound like arguments in favor of a KX or a K2, which a) will be significantly less expensive and b) feature match-needle metering.
Second part first: I think match-needle is the best metering system there is (though again I haven't tried the MX yet -- shop just called to say it's ready!). First SLR I ever used -- might have been a Canon, can't remember -- had match-needle. IIRC, the person who loaned it to me set the shutter, showed me the aperture ring, and said "Turn it until the needle lines up with the lollipop." Pure (and fortunate) coincidence that when I got my first camera it was a match-needle KX.
Now, being used to center-the-needle, match-needle might drive you bonkers. I have a center-the-needle Nikomat FT2 and it drives me bonkers. Not being able to see my shutter speed in the window, and having to take the camera away from my eye to change it, makes me feel impotent. But I know it makes me bonkers only because it's different. Look at
pics online and ask yourself "Can I live with this?" (I don't see how anyone could dislike match-needle, but I bet K1000 shooters wonder how I couldn't like center-the-needle.)
As to that halfway press: Bear in mind that to turn on the meter in the KX, you have to pull the wind lever out to the "stand off" position then press the shutter button half way (it "clicks" into place). The meter then says on till you pop the rewind lever back. Great system and it's second nature for me to pop on the meter. But my Minolta XG-E, which senses your finger on the button, might be better. I'm mid-way through a roll with the Ricoh KR-10, which does require you to hold the button halfway down -- what a pain. The needle "dances" as I hover between on and off. Wish I could just switch the damn thing on and leave it on... but I'll get used to it I'm sure. (PS, besides that quirk and the fact that it doesn't feel as substantial as my Pentaxes, the KR-10 is still a nifty little camera and dirt cheap on eBay. I'm just sayin'.)
First part second: Normally I would say cost shouldn't be a big concern, but the LX does seem to be a *lot* more expensive than the K-cams. Remember how cheap these film cams are compared to digital, though, or their original cost -- you're paying $50 to $250 for something that would have sold for the equivalent of 2 grand or more when new.
From what limited experience I have, an $85 cleaning will fix most issues with most old 35mm SLRs, and if the electronics fail, maybe $25-$50 more. If you buy on eBay there's an even chance it'll need service anyway. I have two cams in the shop, an Nikon FE with failed shutter electronics and the aforementioned MX which needs a new shutter assembly. Estimates just under/just over $100 respectively. A bargain for what should be good-as-new cameras when I get them back.
Mechanical vs electronic? My 45-year-old KX has never been serviced and still takes perfect pix. Ditto for my Nikomat FT2. The FE didn't make it that long, and neither did another FG I was given. BUT -- my electronic Minolta XG-E has to be at least 35 years old and looks like it was used to drive nails, and yet it works perfectly -- I used it to make
one of my favorite pix.
My point is not to be afraid of repair. Once repaired, an SLR, even an electronic one, will likely give you decades of good service if you don't abuse it too badly. Remember, 35mm SLRs were among the best-engineered consumer goods of their era. That said you might want to make repairs now while the expertise and parts are available. I'm thinking of servicing a couple of my cameras just because I know I can get it done now, and the chances are good they'll outlive me.
If the LX is what you want, and you can afford it, get it. You won't miss the $$ once spent, but if you have your heart set on an LX and get something else, you'll always wonder if you should have spent the extra $$. Especially when you screw up a photo.
That said, if money is tight, I say the KX is the way to go. I've never heard a bad word about that camera, and you can buy one *and* get it CLA'd for far less than the cost of an LX. You'll have a camera that will last for decades (I would know!) and the change left over will buy a *lot* of film.
If all of the above applies and you want an automatic exposure (AE) mode, then consider the K2, which is slightly more electronic. Doesn't address your concerns about LX reliability but it the investment is lower. I don't like to rely on AE -- I'm pretty quick to set exposure -- but I have missed pics because the camera wasn't ready or was set wrong. (That said, if you want the camera to always be ready, buy a damn point-and-shoot.
)
Forgive me for going on like this, but I'm having a lot of fun. It's like shopping for a new camera with someone else's money!
I'll leave you with a reminder of what I said earlier: Cameras don't make good shots, photographers do. Given the same lenses, you can get just as good a pic with your K1000 as you could with an LX, though the LX will make it easier. But so will a $50 Pentax-compatible Ricoh KR-10. So don't worry so much about getting the best-of-the-best camera -- get what you think you can work with and practice, practice, practice.
HTH -- Aaron
PS if you're in the Los Angeles area and would like to get hands-on with these cameras, you're welcome to try out my KX, MX, KR-10 and others. PM me.
Last edited by Autonerd; 01-16-2020 at 10:58 PM.