[ChrisPlatt]

A nice clean MX with CLA will cost at least twice the price of one of these grips.
They are priced the same as grips made for modern 35mm rangefinder cameras.

There's no plastic. Construction is entirely of aluminum. It is very lightweight;
much lighter than a Winder MX, even without batteries.

The vertical grip does obstruct access to the self-timer/DOF lever somewhat.
In spite of this I can operate the DOF preview without too many finger contortions,
without taking my eye from the finder. Operation of the self-timer is more difficult.

The neckstrap lugs are not obstructed. Tripod socket is replicated on bottom,
though I wouldn't trust aluminum. There's a cutout to access rewind button.

I like this grip so much I'd consider buying one for each of my Pentax cameras.

Chris

---

Last edited by ChrisPlatt; 06-22-2009 at 03:43 PM.

[AndrewG NY]

Chris, thanks for the speedy answer. I thought maybe the 'grip' portion might be plastic. I don't think the price is necessarily unreasonable for a quality product--from your description, it sounds like it is. $99 can get you a ME Super in dynamite condition, an MX goes for a bit more...but yes, add the CLA (which has more than likely never been done) and it's a more substantial expense. Incidentally, I didn't think the LX needed this so badly since it already has a little more size and a pretty decent add-on finger-grip.

[Jonson PL]

My least favorite Pentax film camera is the IQ zoom point-and-shooter (90WR or something) I bought in 1999. The basic premise is solid and good, and the camera is capable of recording sharp photos on a roll of film, but the functionality of the camera is awful. The sliding lens cover sticks, the flash is far too close to the lens, and the lens zoom motor is as loud as an elevator. Plus, when you stop zooming the lens it makes a whoosh sound like pressurized air is being released - kind of like the door to the holo-deck on the Enterprise. I guess I'd like the camera better if I could install a silencer of some kind.

The 90WR actually had a feature, so that when zooming it wouldn’t suck in dust or water. That might have created the noise you heard. I never owned one myself.

[8540tomg]

Least favourite Pentax – tough call as I haven’t used them all. For me it has to be the K1000. Love/hate has been used to describe this camera. In my case I can’t muster much more in the way of emotion about this unit than indifference. There is just nothing here to get excited about.

I can’t let Lowell’s crack about the MX go unchallenged however. I agree it is too small but when you add the winder it is just about the perfect mechanical SLR.

Cheers

Tom G

[séamuis]

I can’t let Lowell’s crack about the MX go unchallenged however. I agree it is too small but when you add the winder it is just about the perfect mechanical SLR.

I can use it just fine without the winder, but I agree 100%. it just doesn't get much better than the MX for a purely mechanical SLR.

[Brianog]

I think that the MZ-50 is one of the worst because of a gazillion placsic cogs and gears inside. Absolutely beautiful whilst is lasted but it did not last very long.

[raymeedc]

A good many of you younger shooters might not know about this model, (it's not often discussed in polite photographic circles..... in fact, many of us who were around at the time won't even admit it ever existed) but for me it was definitely the notorious, much maligned Frogger-XX2599LS. A lot of people must have agreed with me, as not only didn't it last long on the market, but I haven't seen one offered up for sale in quite a while. The last one that appeared on Ebay, the seller offered anyone $100 to take it off his hands. Needless to say, he had no takers. The moldy green sticky exterior, glassless lens, see-through film chamber..... what a nightmare. Most owners probably followed my lead & beat it to death with a Spotmatic.