I love the k1000. If it came in black I would get one in an instant and never look back.
I thought about a KX for quite some time. But I never /ever/ use those extra features (except maybe the aperture/shutter readouts in VF). On 3/20/07, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you have to have a needle, the KX is the closest to an MX > except for size. The K1000 is like a stripped KX, you would > not want that unless you couldnt afford or find a clean KX > as the KX has everything the K1000 has and much more goodies like > shutter speeds and apertures in finder, mirrorlock, and > DOF preview. KX is essentially the same size as a spotty or > K1000, which is larger than a MX though. > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Scott Loveless > Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 5:32 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: Lens suggestions > > > 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 > > > -- > 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
