[gabriel_bc]

seems the difference is that the K1000 iso range is 32-1600 and the K1000 SE is 20-1600 according to bojidar dimitrov's page (a big bible for everything related to body, lens, and accessories).

Also, the SE has a split prism, whereas the rest usually have a microprism ground glass (though there are non-SE bodies with a split prism as well).

[gabriel_bc]

My weakness is the K2/K2DMD…

Phil.

That's a good weakness - I'm really enjoying the one I just bought. The LX plays second fiddle now.

[gofour3]

I suppose I can finally add my entries here.

This first shot is the K1000 I purchase back in 1984 - my first Pentax SLR with its original 50/F2. It had been tucked away in the closet for about ten years (as I recall I bought my first digital P&S in 2000). I was de-cluttering last year when I rediscovered the camera. Then, I went to the web to see if it had any value - I intended to sell it. I quickly learned film was not dead. It wasn't long before I found this forum, and, well, we all know what happens when you hang out in the film section.


The first sign of my addiction came along August 2011 in the form of a K2. I found this one at Goodwill (lens acquired later). Eric has put it in tip-top condition.


By February 2012, I decided I "needed" a KX. Eric has seen this one too.


And once you have the K1000, K2, and KX, you gotta get a KM (this lens came with the KX). Eric's seen this one as well.


In March I was having some difficulty with getting the focus right, so I thought I'd try an auto focus. I picked up this ZX-7 and lens from the 'bay in April. It's like new and easy to use, but I really do prefer the K-series bodies and manual focus.


Since I had the other four K's, I should also have an SE, right? This one has seen better days and is waiting its turn to visit Eric.


My last (final?) purchase was this black KX with the 50/1.7. It's in very good cosmetic condition, but it has some functional issues. It's gonna bump ahead of the SE in the to-Eric queue.


Now that I've collected these bodies, I can spend less time searching for more and more time actually using the ones I have.

cheers,
Fred

Very nice set!!

Phil.

[hollywoodfred]

Thanks Phil. I've enjoyed "the hunt" while collecting these bodies and lens. But now I've created a minor dilemma in that at any point in time up to five of these may be loaded with film (currently four), and I can’t readily decide which one to use. The issue is somewhat subdued simply because I don’t go out shooting very often. When I do go, I’m normally struggling with which body/lens combinations to bring. Although, I realize the subject matter should influence the decision.

With hopes of reducing the decision making, now I’m looking for two or three cases/bags so I can pack up individual kits. Then I can just grab a bag and go. Maybe I’ll finally complete a roll with this strategy!
Fred

---

Last edited by hollywoodfred; 11-06-2012 at 04:51 AM. Reason: spelling

[hollywoodfred]

I was curious about the two points below, so I checked my SE.

seems the difference is that the K1000 iso range is 32-1600 and the K1000 SE is 20-1600 according to bojidar dimitrov's page (a big bible for everything related to body, lens, and accessories).

On my copy the range is 20 to 3200. Not that I'll ever use either end.

Also, the SE has a split prism, whereas the rest usually have a microprism ground glass (though there are non-SE bodies with a split prism as well).

Yes indeed, it has a split prism. None of my other bodies have this feature.

[Argenticien]

With hopes of reducing the decision making, now I’m looking for two or three cases/bags so I can pack up individual kits. Then I can just grab a bag and go. Maybe I’ll finally complete a roll with this strategy!

I've got only about 12 cameras, not 1200 like some of you lot , but I have this problem as well, as I have very little time to shoot due to my job and caring for an infirm family member. I don't want to solve this by thinning the camera herd (HELL no!) or by pulling out and processing half-used rolls of film. I'm increasingly thinking I should get a bulk film loader and start rolling my own 12-exposure rolls. This approach has been field-tested and found successful, in that when I take out my 6x6 medium format kit, I have a much easier time finishing a roll. Freestyle apparently sell a basic loader for USD 25, plus I'm going to start watching eBay and craigslist for these things. You'll sometimes see one being sold with a partial roll of film still in it. (Bid as if it's spoiled; be happily surprised if it isn't.)

--Dave

[TomB_tx]

I'm increasingly thinking I should get a bulk film loader and start rolling my own 12-exposure rolls. --Dave

I still use a Watson loader I've had since the 1960s. One thing to watch is overusing cassettes, as eventually the felt seals get dirty and start scratching the film.
Doesn't seem long ago when you could buy 12-exposure rolls from Kodak... I guess now the costs of making and distributing are greater than the cost of the film.

[builttospill]

Now that I've collected these bodies, I can spend less time searching for more and more time actually using the ones I have.

cheers,
Fred

It's a very nice collection Fred, but you're missing a couple. So maybe you're not done?
The brown K1000 SE


And my favorite K body, the K2 DMD

[hollywoodfred]

It's a very nice collection Fred, but you're missing a couple. So maybe you're not done?
The brown K1000 SE


And my favorite K body, the K2 DMD

(in my very best Homer Simpson) Ooooooooooo, cam-er-ras!

Your brown SE and the DMD are very nice. They would look nice on my shelf.

But no, as much as I admire, maybe even drool, over a K2 DMD, I promised myself and my wife, that I was done buying bodies. Maybe I'll trade one in some day. For now, I'm gonna try to show some restraint and keep my promise.

[gofour3]

I promised myself and my wife, that I was done buying bodies. Maybe I'll trade one in some day. For now, I'm gonna try to show some restraint and keep my promise.

I know the feeling, my wife keeps on asking when I'll be finished buying lenses, I always answer "soon"!

Phil.

[Swift1]

My latest acquisition sitting next to my trusty old 67.
Surprisingly the 67, fitted with the Tak 90/2.8 LS and the WLF, weighs about the same as the Bronica.

[Jonathan Mac]

They're both beautiful. Ever since I got the Pentax 645 I've been itching to get a medium format camera with a WLF, but medium format is much more expensive a hobby than 35mm (or digital).

[Swift1]

They're both beautiful. Ever since I got the Pentax 645 I've been itching to get a medium format camera with a WLF, but medium format is much more expensive a hobby than 35mm (or digital).

My Mom has a 645 that I borrow sometimes and the difference IQ wise between it and the 67 is huge IMHO. I've found for me that medium format forces me to slow down and think about my photos more so that I end up with a much higher percentage of photos I like. In that regard, I would say that it's probably more affordable for me than 35mm.

[Jonathan Mac]

My Mom has a 645 that I borrow sometimes and the difference IQ wise between it and the 67 is huge IMHO. I've found for me that medium format forces me to slow down and think about my photos more so that I end up with a much higher percentage of photos I like. In that regard, I would say that it's probably more affordable for me than 35mm.

I've heard that a lot, that the difference between 35mm and 645 is not nearly such an upgrade as from 35mm to 6x6 or 6x7. One day I'd like a 6x7, but price is a big factor. 6x7 cameras in good condition are very expensive, 645 & 6x6s are far more common and therefore cheaper. On the up side, the 645 is small and light enough for me to consider taking it on travels, with a 6x7 that would be more difficult as it weighs around a half kilo more, plus the bigger, heavier lenses. I know a place here in Madrid that still has new-in-box 67 bodies and lenses, not that I could afford them. I plan to take the 645 with me to Edinburgh in January and leave the DSLR at home. I'm looking forward to not having the easy option to get a shot, I think it will do me good .

[stevebrot]

My Mom has a 645 that I borrow sometimes and the difference IQ wise between it and the 67 is huge IMHO...

I've heard that a lot, that the difference between 35mm and 645 is not nearly such an upgrade as from 35mm to 6x6 or 6x7...

Colton...glad I was not the only one to make this observation. Summer of 2011, I was allowed use of a 645N with two-lens kit for a month. I put several rolls of film through it and was totally impressed with the camera. I wanted it. I probably still do want it except for one thing. The 645 negatives were incrementally better than what I get with 35mm, but nowhere near the quality of 6x7 using a roll-film holder on my view camera.

Ouch!


Steve