Hey, Nick. The MX has 5 LEDs on the right side of the viewfinder. I, too, prefer a needle, but the LEDs work very well for low light and when you might have a dark filter on the lens. The LEDs suck butt in bright sun. In addition to the MX I also have a K1000. It's a bit bigger than the MX, but with the meter needle I think it compliments the MX nicely.
I also have an M85/2. Not a bad little lens at all. I posted this photo well over a year ago to a mixed response. It's the only one I have online right now that I can definitely say was taken with the M85/2. Hand held, mid-afternoon, probably HP5+, but I'd have to dig out the negs to be sure. http://twosixteen.com/gallery/index.php?id=332 HTH. On 3/20/07, Nick Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I should've specified that these will be going on film bodies with > absolutely no thought whatsoever to using them on a digital. > > I need to ask about bodies sometime soon too. I'd really like to get > an MX, but I don't know if I can live with only having the three LEDs > for an exposure meter. Is there something the size of an MX (that is > fully mechanical) that has a needle in the viewfinder meter? > > On 3/20/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > My answers (others may vary) > > > > 1.) The m28 f2.0 doesn't have a sterling reputation, in fact most of the > > older Pentax 28mm lenses don't have such good reps, except for the [K] > > 28mm f3.5. (I wouldn't know at that focal length I can put up with > > f2.8, and besides I have the "rare" [K] 30mm. Yea, yea, yea, too much > > information). > > > > 2.) For over all quality the A 85mm f1.4 is supposed to be the best. (I > > couldn't justify the price myself). The M 85mm f2.0 is small, about the > > same size as a 50mm normal, relatively fast, and moderately sharp, (very > > sharp after f5.6), and not nearly as expensive used as any other Pentax > > 85). It gives a nice ~135mm AOV, (well 127mm actually), on an APS > > digital and makes pleasing portraits on 35mm film. > > > > 3.) The 85 f1.4 became available often enough, every few weeks on e-bay, > > when I was paying attention. Just be prepared to trade your first born > > for one. > > > > You don't mention which body, or if it's film or digital you'll be > > using, just remember that the M lenses don't communicate with the body > > and you'll need to use stop down metering on any Pentax digital, and it > > won't work at all on a *ist Film camera, (I assume that with these > > lenses in mind you're not going to be using one of the real bottom > > feeding cameras). > > > > Nick Wright wrote: > > > So I'm starting to think a little more seriously about putting > > > together the Pentax kit. I'm all about the available light so I'm > > > looking at large aperture primes and would like to ask y'all's > > > opinions about them. > > > > > > Specifically I'm looking at the M28mm f/2, M50mm f/1.4, and either the > > > A85mm f/1.4 or the 85mm f/2. Pros, cons? > > > > > > And in regards to the 85/1.4, how often do those come available for sale? > > > > > > Thanks in advance! > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend lw uf > > thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > -- > ~Nick Wright > http://blog.phojonick.com/ > http://www.phojonick.com/ > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com Shoot more film! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
