[Argenticien]

I just tried four different screw mount lenses on my MX. zeiss planar 50 ZM, auto-takumar 55, super-takumar 55 and SMC Takumar 55. the only one that actually worked was the Zeiss. none of them actually lined up at 12oclock so it would be useless anyway, but the aperture was visible in the window with the zeiss. I believe this is because of the placement of the aperture ring relative to the rear of the lens. the takumar's aperture rings simply aren't far enough forward on the lens to be seen through the window. so aligned or not, I don't think you will be able to utilize the window with takumars.

Thanks séamuis and everyone else who looked into it. I should have said that I knew this was a problem in two dimensions. I did assume that the index mark might not line up at 12:00 on various lenses (some of my Taks do, some don't, on my genuine Pentax adapter when in my ME Super or K20D). What I was more asking, and you just got at, séamuis, was whether the aperture ring was too close to the camera body or too far from it, in some cases, so that the Judas window would miss the entire aperture ring. Sounds like it will be a gamble, varying lens by lens, if I ever get an MX. I love the idea--and the engineering triumph--of a full-info viewfinder accomplished through electromechanical and optical means. (Of course all modern digis have full info, but it's less impressive when accomplished by digital read-outs.) So the MX is on my wish list, or maybe I'll switch it up entirely and get a Minolta SRT-102.
--Dave

[PeterAM]

The best part of this thread is that people are shooting (and in some cases discovering) film. After looking through this, I decided (for the 4th or 5th time) that I need to get my film cameras CLA'd. I have my first Pentax, a Spotmatic that I bought in the 60's, a Super Program, an ZX-M and a UC-1. Haven't used the Spotmatic or Super Program in a fair number of years; have been using the ZX-M with a wide angle, as a pocket camera. The UC-1 is a terrific little camera; some of my better film shots were with this camera. My favorite was always the Super Program; the only fault that it had (for me) was the way that it always felt somewhat uncomfortable, gripwise. To correct that, I always used it with a winder attached (still fairly small), but not always on.

Keep shooting film!

[uswrdm02]

Anyone know if Pentax has a good Rangefinder with a light meter?

Rich M

[stevebrot]

Anyone know if Pentax has a good Rangefinder with a light meter?

Rich M

While Pentax did make compact AF point-n-shoot 35mm cameras, rangefinder cameras are conspicuously absent from the line.


Steve

[séamuis]

Anyone know if Pentax has a good Rangefinder with a light meter?

Rich M

pentax, make a rangefinder? no. no, they never have.

[jeztastic]

Anyone know if Pentax has a good Rangefinder with a light meter?

Rich M

Still not sure what a film rangefinder gets you over a small film SLR such as an ME or Super Program. I've tried both and infinitely prefer the Super Program in everything apart from shutter noise. With a cheap rangefinder you are often stuck with a cheap, not very wide lens. With an expensive rangefinder you are stuck with... Well, something no better than a Pentax SLR with a slightly quieter shutter.

[monochrome]

pentax, make a rangefinder? no. no, they never have.

IIRC a main benefit of the pentaprism and reflex mirror corrected the shortcomings of the rangefinder.

[séamuis]

IIRC a main benefit of the pentaprism and reflex mirror corrected the shortcomings of the rangefinder.

tell that to a leica owner. shortcomings, what shortcomings?

[monochrome]

tell that to a leica owner. shortcomings, what shortcomings?

I did put the C after I, I and R

[ChrisPlatt]

IIRC pros and serious amateurs flocked to SLRs from the mid-1960's onward.
FWIW this coincides with the introduction of the Pentax Spotmatic.

Rangefinder sales slumped.
Leica nearly ceased completely production of rangefinder cameras in the 1970's.

Of course both types of camera have their advantages.
But judging by sales figures SLRs apparently gave better results to more buyers.

Chris

[séamuis]

IIRC serious amateurs flocked to SLRs in droves starting in the mid to late-1960's.
Leica nearly ceased completely production of rangefinder cameras in the 1970's.

Of course both types of camera have their advantages.
But judging by sales figures SLRs apparently gave better results to more buyers.

Chris

as a former leica owner, I will agree to this assessment. knowing Pentax pretty much hurdled the SLR into the mainstream, made the SLR what it is today, its always a bit odd to me when people ask if they ever made a rangefinder. one of those "are you serious?" moments. haha, but I never can help but wonder when thats asked, what such a camera would have looked like.

[TomB_tx]

While the Asahiflex was an SLR, it was often used more like an old Leica A, which had no rangefinder built-in. (An accessory was available.) People generally shot stopped-down, scale focused, and used the Asahiflex eye-level viewfinder. The SLR finder was used (awkwardly) for close-up and when critical focus was needed; which wasn't often.
I just returned from about 6-weeks in California, and ended up taking... a film rangefinder instead of an SLR. I enjoyed my old Leica M6 tremendously, and never missed having an SLR for "travel" photography: seascapes and landscapes, using 21, 35 & 50 lenses. When my wife joined me for the return trip I stopped by the Grand Canyon for my first visit since 1956. I shot with the M6, my wife with my M9 digital rangefinder. I enjoy using the M6 more, and the Ektar and Portra have nice signatures. But, using the same lenses on both cameras, and having the film scanned to the same resolution as the M9, the digital does capture finer detail.
My wife would have done better with her Pentax K-5, as she doesn't use manual cameras often; but I still prefer film and manual operation.

[stevebrot]

Still not sure what a film rangefinder gets you over a small film SLR such as an ME or Super Program.

I own both several rangefinders as well as a Super Program, but strangely, the Super Program sees very little use while two of the rangefinders currently have film in them. Go figure...


Steve

[stevebrot]

While the Asahiflex was an SLR, it was often used more like an old Leica A, which had no rangefinder built-in.

Your excellent comment reminds me of a photo I saw today of a Praktina FX. This professional grade, German-made SLR featured both reflex and non-reflex viewfinders. Since automatic aperture was a rarity and not supported by the body, the reflex finder was of limited usefulness when stopped down for shooting.

Praktina FX - Antique and Vintage Cameras


Steve

[jeztastic]

I own both several rangefinders as well as a Super Program, but strangely, the Super Program sees very little use while two of the rangefinders currently have film in them. Go figure...


Steve

You're gonna have to figure for me! Why do you prefer the rangefinders?