malkav
Lifetime Member
Posts: 132
|
Post by malkav on Apr 15, 2007 0:38:06 GMT -5
Hello all, I have the chance to acquire 1 of 2 cameras. One is a Pentax K1000 w/ 50mm lens for 60.00 +TX, the other is a Minolta SRT 101 w/ 50mm lens and a couple of extra things like a camera bag and such for 89.00 +TX. I know that the k1000 has been hyped as the be all, end all of manual focus cameras, and I've also heard good things about the SRT 101. I'd love to have both, but the car decided it was feeling neglected, and decided to start leaking oil from the rear main seal. KA-CHING!!! So I decided to ask the panel: Which one would be the better buy? Thanks, Edward
|
|
|
Post by craigh on Apr 15, 2007 7:17:11 GMT -5
I'm a Minolta fan & naturally will suggest that. The two "bad" points about the Minolta is the mirror lock up. My fingers tend to move it while pressing the shutter & locks up the mirror (it's minor but Minolta did it better on the SR-7 where you had to push the lock up button in to turn it). The other is the meter on off switch. It's on the bottom. I've gotten used to it over the years, but can be a pain in the neck when mounted on a tripod.
The Pentax is a bit smaller. I do not think is has a meter on/off, you need the lenscap. Also if you were to get one, make sure it was made in Japan. The later ones that I've seen look to junky to me.
Craig
|
|
|
Post by vintageslrs on Apr 15, 2007 9:21:53 GMT -5
Both are great cameras..... given the choice between those 2....I think I would take the Minolta...however if you were to throw a Pentax Spotmatic into the mix.....I think I would choose it. ;D
Bob
|
|
|
Post by doubs43 on Apr 15, 2007 10:57:04 GMT -5
The availability of lenses alone would push me to the Pentax. The K-1000 is essentially the SP-1000 with a bayonet mount. If you have a look at finished auctions on ebay, you'll find that the K-1000 is very popular and sells well. Pentax reliability is well known.
Walker
|
|
|
Post by Randy on Apr 15, 2007 16:11:11 GMT -5
I just sold a perfect K-1000 for $51.00 on the Bay of evil. I kept my K-1000 Snake though. The SRTs are great cameras.
|
|
|
Post by John Parry on Apr 16, 2007 6:44:07 GMT -5
Agree with Bob. Once you buy either, you're committing to a new lens system, that's only good for Minolta or Pentax. A Spotmatic in good condition opens up the huge market in M42 (Praktica mount) lenses. They will fit any M42 camera, and any other camera you purchase will undoubtedly have an M42 adapter available.
Having said that, the two you mention are both great cameras. I actually like the lens lockup of the SRT for tripod shots. You'll enjoy either.
Regards - John
|
|
casualcollector
Lifetime Member
In Search of "R" Serial Soligors
Posts: 619
|
Post by casualcollector on Apr 16, 2007 15:59:09 GMT -5
I just picked up a K-1000 yesterday. It is marked made in China. The lens is marked made in Taiwan. Prior to the China marking, I recall seeing them marked as made in Hong Kong. I don't believe they were ever made in Singapore. Rollei manufactured there for a while.
|
|
rover
Lifetime Member
Dad with a Camera, or two, or...
Posts: 101
|
Post by rover on Apr 18, 2007 4:59:58 GMT -5
I don't think you can go wrong with either. Both are basically equal cameras as far as features, both lens systems are large, readily available, and relatively inexpensive. Both cameras should be easily repaired if necessary, but your decision may be best made by deciding which camera is in better condition. If one is better functionally, not in need of immediate service, then perhaps that is the way to go.
|
|
|
Post by Randy on Apr 18, 2007 7:13:29 GMT -5
I would have to say the SRT would be the better choice also. The SRT has Mirror Lock Up, Depth of Field Preview, and you can shut off the Meter. With the K-1000, you have none of these features, although they say if you keep the lens cap on the Pentax it should shut down the Meter. The only disadvantage with the SRT is that it takes the redundant 625 1.3 Volt battery, redundant meaning outlawed. You can use the 625A 1.5 Volt if you move your film speed down a notch. You can also buy a proper 1.3 Volt Wein Cell Battery that is available on line.
|
|
|
Post by Peter S. on Apr 18, 2007 12:54:04 GMT -5
Dear Edward, I think You got plenty of comments on the camera bodies. But when it comes to Minolta not the bodies are the big asset but the plenty supply of good and inexpensive lenses. A decent kit of primes (2.8/35 no matter which, 1.7/50 - 55mm filter thread, 2.8/135 no matter which, MC Rokkor 4/200) can be collected for less than 100$$, and another 100$ could buy a MC W.Rokkor 2.8/24. The only difficult item is a short tele, where my personal favourite is a Tokina 2.5/90 Macro. The Minolta 85's are expensive as the 1.2/58 monster normal is. As a rule of thumb anything that says "Rokkor" on it, is at least a decent lens. The older MC Rokkor lenses are said to be a bit inferior when it comes to their coatings. I do however doubt, whether those difference do matter. Indeed I prefer the older lenses, since those got a silky feeling of incredible precision. The rubber grip is the only non-glass or metal piece of the whole lens. In case You want to seek informations on Manual Focus Minolta gear, be shure to surf to those two places: www.rokkorfiles.com/and members.aol.com/manualminolta/index.htmI am afraid, that I can't supply You with corresponding information to Pentax - but from what I hear those got a similar dedicated community of users. Best regards Peter
|
|
malkav
Lifetime Member
Posts: 132
|
Post by malkav on Apr 20, 2007 16:32:16 GMT -5
Well, it looks like it's going to be the Minolta being as the Pentax was either sold or the owner came and picked it back up as it was a consignment sale and had been in the shop for at least 6 months. I want to thank everybody who replied. Thanks. I just hope the Minolta is still available.
|
|
malkav
Lifetime Member
Posts: 132
|
Post by malkav on May 1, 2007 21:59:17 GMT -5
Well, I bought the Minolta. I only paid $47.70 w/tax for it though as the blades in the lens, which is a very nice looking MC Rokkor-PF 1.4 58mm, are stuck wide open. Later I went to a camera shop near by to see if they had any Rokkor glass, and found a MC Rokkor-X PF 1.7 50mm lens for $42.35 w/tax. I was so jazzed at finding it I totally zoned on doing my standard "used lens" check for fungus, and other problems. So when I get it home I find it has a couple of spots of fungus on the inside of the rear element. I'm gonna run a 12 shot test roll through it after I replace the light-seals to see if the creeping crud is going to effect the pictures. So I still spent $90.05 on it all. Oh, well. Live and learn.
|
|
|
Post by Peter S. on May 2, 2007 14:22:02 GMT -5
Dear Edward,
I would go the seller who sold You the lens with the fungus, and start to lamment. The lens is very capable, and chances are good, that You don't notice the effects of the fungus in the early state. Having it fixed will cost twice the amount You spent for the lens, minimum. Hence such a common lens has no commercial value any more.
The MC Rokkor-PF 1.4/58 is often affected by stuck aperture blades. The lens itself is however pretty shought after, as it is said to behave a bit like its big cousin the 1.2/58. You might want to find someone that disassembles and cleans it. It is possible to disassemble it only partly (i.e. to remove the aperture unit without completely disassembling it) and this is less expensive than a complete CLA. So don't throw it away (if it is OK otherwise).
You can also do some hunting in the bay of evil. I bought a MD Rokkor 1.7/50 for only 5.- €, and it is perfect in all respects.
But I second Your idea to first run a test film - You could assess how much You like the results. And the handling of that old camera.
Best regards Peter
|
|
|
Post by Randy on May 2, 2007 15:11:38 GMT -5
Sheesh....Edward, maybe you shoulda bought one of my cameras from the Classified Section, it woulda been a lot cheaper, eh?
|
|
malkav
Lifetime Member
Posts: 132
|
Post by malkav on May 3, 2007 0:12:36 GMT -5
Yes Randy, it probably would have been cheaper, and I would have known it was in way better shape/condition.
|
|