Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-30-2009, 05:54 PM   #16
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 89
I greatly prefer the OM series SLRs to the Pentax MX. The OM lenses are superb. I'm very new to Pentax, but the SMC lenses I do have handle very, very well. The Oly lenses tend to be even smaller.

07-31-2009, 06:53 PM   #17
Senior Member
jslifoaw's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Toronto/Victoria
Posts: 262
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote

Also, although I have not had a tone of M lenses to play with, I have found the damping and action of the focusing mechanizm on teh M lenses to be much less conssitent than the same focal length K lenses. I cant quantify this but they "feel cheap".
I think you need to pick and choose the lenses. I own the M28/3.5 and M50/1.4, but I have used all of the other M 50s and the 50/1.4 is in a complete different class in terms of build and smoothness of focusing. All of the K and M42 lenses I have used are generally much tighter which I did not like.

It and the MX make a much smaller combination than, say, a K2 and a K50/1.2 which I had at one point and was monstrous by comparison.
07-31-2009, 07:47 PM   #18
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
As an MX user, in terms of usability, I would actually put the OM-1 a little ahead of the MX. I feel the OM-1 has a better viewfinder and the match needle is a little more practical than LEDs. However the MX's meter is a little more responsive. The placement of the OM's shutter speed dial is like the earlier Nikkormats and once you get used to it, you control the exposure variables of shutter speed and aperture with the left hand, which is good if you need to keep your eye to the viewfinder. With the MX, the shutter speed dial requires use of the right thumb and finger, which means you can't switch shutter speeds and press the shutter release button as quickly. A retired photojournalist friend who used the OM preferred this layout for this reason. Again these are small issues that really boils down to personal preferences.
07-31-2009, 08:57 PM   #19
Pentaxian
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Queens NYC
Posts: 4,825
They're both too small for me, but given the choice I'll take the MX any day.

Chris

08-01-2009, 05:52 AM   #20
Veteran Member
glasbak's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 344
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
Also, although I have not had a tone of M lenses to play with, I have found the damping and action of the focusing mechanizm on teh M lenses to be much less conssitent than the same focal length K lenses. I cant quantify this but they "feel cheap".
The takumar and most early K mount lenses used a combination of brass and aluminum, the M series used aluminum only in the focus heliocoid.

The aluminum only construction is more affected by grease disappearing over time compaired to the brass with aluminum combination.

That may explain the 'cheap' feeling of M lenses.

George
08-01-2009, 05:58 AM   #21
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteOriginally posted by glasbak Quote
The takumar and most early K mount lenses used a combination of brass and aluminum, the M series used aluminum only in the focus heliocoid.

The aluminum only construction is more affected by grease disappearing over time compaired to the brass with aluminum combination.

That may explain the 'cheap' feeling of M lenses.

George
I certainly did not know that. very interesting.
08-01-2009, 10:27 PM   #22
Pentaxian
8540tomg's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,454
QuoteOriginally posted by glasbak Quote
The takumar and most early K mount lenses used a combination of brass and aluminum, the M series used aluminum only in the focus heliocoid.

The aluminum only construction is more affected by grease disappearing over time compaired to the brass with aluminum combination.

That may explain the 'cheap' feeling of M lenses.

George
I wasn't aware of this either. In general I would agree with this statement but M 35/2 is the smoothest focusing lens I own. An exception to the rule perhaps?

I'm not sure I would classify the M series lenses as "cheap" feeling. I have a number of both K and M series lenses and no question the Ks are larger and more substantial. It wasn't until the A series came out that I felt Pentax lenses began to look "cheap", at least some of them, with the increasing use of more plastic in the lens bodies.

I guess I must have liked the MX better than the OM-1/2 as I actually did buy the MX. No regrets on that score. I do recall when looking at SLRs in the early 1980s I preferred the look and feel of the Pentax M series to the Nikon, Canon and Olympus glass I was able to compare them to.

Tom G

Last edited by 8540tomg; 08-02-2009 at 04:51 AM. Reason: typo
08-04-2009, 02:09 PM   #23
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Cow Belt
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 162
QuoteOriginally posted by 8540tomg Quote
I wasn't aware of this either. In general I would agree with this statement but M 35/2 is the smoothest focusing lens I own. An exception to the rule perhaps?

I'm not sure I would classify the M series lenses as "cheap" feeling. I have a number of both K and M series lenses and no question the Ks are larger and more substantial. It wasn't until the A series came out that I felt Pentax lenses began to look "cheap", at least some of them, with the increasing use of more plastic in the lens bodies.

I guess I must have liked the MX better than the OM-1/2 as I actually did buy the MX. No regrets on that score. I do recall when looking at SLRs in the early 1980s I preferred the look and feel of the Pentax M series to the Nikon, Canon and Olympus glass I was able to compare them to.

Tom G
Olympus gained a substantial reputation, mostly in the UK, because it came out first with a small SLR with a large FOV viewfinder (OM1), and excellent lenses. Pentax followed later with even smaller camera (MX) and smaller lenses, though slightly short of the quality of the Zuikos sold with the OM-1. Overall, the MX was a more modern camera with a battery system which still uses D-76 cells from the corner store, is as modular as the OM series and has a series of lenses which can be used, mutatis mutandis with all Pentax DSLRs; Olympus lenses cannot. Olympus was reputed to be more fragile than other mainstream marques but this was not true in actual use. Olympus was aided beyond imagination in the UK by the patronage of Eric Hosking in wildlife photography and Patrick Lichfield in fashion and high society pictures, by Maitani's undoubted talent and Olympus advertising. Pentax never made a serious bid to be a staple of professional photography; these claims were made almost entirely by Pentax users. One was never entirely sure just what Pentax aimed at in their advertising.

I chose and used Pentax MX bodies for thirty years on the basis of a review I saw in Hongkong of a large number of similar cameras in a now-forgotten British photography magazine in 1980. I needed system long lenses and only the SMCP-M 400mm f5.6 came within my budget. The Zuiko 400mm f6.3 was better but substantially more expensive. In the long run, my choice has served me better as I still use eight Pentax system lenses on the GX20 and K200D cameras, several of which are original purchases in 1981. None of this was foreseen and I still think that the Olympus lenses were superior for the most part.

08-04-2009, 06:18 PM   #24
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 255
I prefer the OM1. As others have commented, I find the shutter speed ring really easy to use and the viewfinder is something that everyone should have the pleasure of looking through at some time in their lives.

I don't find the LED's and the half circle thing in the MX as easy to interpret as the needle in the OM 1 (other Pentaxes with LED's are no problem), and the shutter speed dial is stiff. IMO the MX is just not as ergonomic as the OM.

But I got the MX with a M 50/1.7 for a good price at a camera market so I keep it as a suicide mission camera.
08-05-2009, 03:09 PM   #25
Pentaxian
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Queens NYC
Posts: 4,825
QuoteOriginally posted by chhayanat Quote
Olympus was reputed to be more fragile than other mainstream marques...
I would not dispute this claim.

Chris
08-05-2009, 10:19 PM   #26
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AUS
Posts: 3,262
QuoteOriginally posted by geauxpez Quote
If the ME Super had that shutter speed ring I would not even consider selling it.
If the ME Super had any form of ring or knob I'd be happy because I'd stop dialing in EV comp with ISO selector knob.

Those buttons are useless.
08-07-2009, 01:29 PM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Copenhagen
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,845
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
While pentax did achieve the small size and single filter for many lenses, at the longer end this was achieved by giving up maximum apertures.
Very interesting. Hadn’t thought of that. Thanks
10-26-2013, 02:03 AM   #28
Junior Member




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 32
With film cameras I prefer the Olympus OM1 to the Pentax MX or K1000, indeed I prefer it to my Leica M6 or M3. It feels like a jewel in the hand and the viewfinder is superb though probably not the absolute brightest in the world. The lenses feel superb. You get used to the position of the shutter speed and aperture dials very quickly and will likely prefer those positions.

A very enthusiastic shout out for the Olympus OM1; it is a pity the did not maintain OM mount compatibility when shifting to digital. That is largely academic however since they have abandoned their dSLRs in favor of mirrorless.
10-26-2013, 07:27 AM   #29
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,032
There is no denying that Yoshihisa Maitani was an innovator and the 1972 release of the OM-1 turned the industry on its head. But Pentax took notice and the MX improved on it with smaller overall body size with shutter speed and aperture visible in a larger magnification and coverage viewfinder.

10-27-2013, 04:05 PM   #30
Senior Member
johnha's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lancashire, UK
Posts: 250
Reading this has prompted me to dig out the OM-1 I won by accident on ebay, and I've only just realised the meter actually responds (I had thought it wasn't working). I haven't run film through it, but compared to my MX - while I generally prefer needles to LEDs in manual cameras - having the aperture & shutter speed visible in the finder is a big improvement. I don't think I'd ever get used to the ISO being where the shutter speed dial should be either. The finders look similar to me, but I wear glasses and might be missing any differences.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
mx
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Has anyone compared Olympus E-5 with Pentax K-5? Reportage Pentax K-5 25 10-28-2010 04:19 PM
olympus ep 1 with pentax lenses jonny1986 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 30 01-03-2010 10:58 PM
Pentax should copy Olympus... Arpe Photographic Technique 2 09-28-2009 04:05 PM
Pentax? Sony? Olympus? rennwerkes Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 10-21-2008 11:59 AM
Sold my Olympus... Getting a Pentax! SHIFT Welcomes and Introductions 5 12-11-2006 03:40 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:49 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top