MX vs ME-F

I have a chance to buy an MX to supplement/replace my ME-F. I do like mechanical cameras, which is why I've started down the rangefinder road, but I still like using SLRs.

Now, I've become suspicious of the ME-F's ability to expose accurately, as the AE function has let me down several times, to the point I worry about the electronic shutter in manual mode.

So-is the MX "better" enough, or should I just continue to build a RF outfit? Opinions solicited for instruction and fun.

Aaron

I have two MX bodies I've used since they were bought new in the 1970's. They have always been solid and dependable. They also have DOF preview, something I consider essential in a camera body.

Can't comment on the MX, but I can tell you what's wrong with the ME-F though...

The ASA/ISO dial is a key part of the exposure circuitry. It is a simple rotary potentiometer, and it gets dirty and worn. Reselecting the ISO or adjusting the exposure compensation a couple of times is usually enough to get it right. There are no seals on the dial, so any dust and muck works its way through the dial onto the pot. When it goes wrong like this it underexposes really badly!

However, in the end the pot needs changing. I got it down to an art (when I had an ME-F), and Pentax UK supplied me replacement units for it. I did it to my ME-F, and to two ME-Supers too. However, I'm not sure if the components are so readily available. I suspect that a decent repair centre will do the job for you (There are a couple recommended on this forum).

Hope that helps!
Matt

The other possible reason for under-exposure with the ME derivatives is poor battery contact. If the power fails the shuttere fires at 1/2000 sec, and will almost certainly mean under-exposure!

The MX is a totally different beast, being the same specification as the Spotmatic but in a much more compact form and with better GPD based metering. It is fully manual and only needs batteries for the meter. The batteries will easily last a year of even quite intense use - a revelation for digital users who spend their lives recharging....

But the two camera types are totally different in comcept. If you need the electronic-shutter auto exposure then the MX is not like that. But it is robust and reliable, providing you can find a good one. With mechanical shutters the faster speeds may be slow by now, so an overhaul would be a good idea. After that, you have a terrfic camera.

Here's my dilemma-

Since getting back to being a bit more serious, I've shot quite a lot of film through both the MEF and the Leica. My shooting has improved, but I notice that I print more of the MEF shots than Leica.

On the other hand, I have recently lost half a roll of Velvia while shooting at a local festival due to depending on the AE function. I don't think I trust it!

So-maybe an MX will do double duty!

Maybe it will. Frankly, I agree with your choice. I find composing a picture through a SLR much much easier than through a rangefinder's viewfinder. In terms of speed of operation as well, the pentax SLRs beat the leica every time for me.

I was lent a leica M3 outfit a while ago, and I absolutely hated it.

In your position I'd buy an MZ5n.

Use it in manual mode, and it will give you focus confirmation and indicate the correct exposure. It's got AF for when you may need it. And it's much newer than the MX and MEF, so should give you longer service.

G

That's very true. A good MX would be fine, if you can find one, but you are more likely to find a good MZ5, MZ5n or even MZ3.

Well, I've committed to an MX, should have it here soon. Thanks for the advice.

I hate having too many cameras. Something may have to go. Are MEF parts becoming scarce?

just a quick thought when did you last change the batteries in the camera as it soulds like it switched to manual shutters

The batteries were changed in November. It's true, they could be to blame, and as yet I haven't lost a manual shot-but there is supposed to be a low-battery indicator, and in the 23 years I've owned the camera, it's only gone off once. Will it mess up on me again? Not sure...

The MX is already on its way. I'll keep the MEF, and use it as well, but I am a little gun shy now.

The MX is here-what a great little camera! I may never have bought a rangefinder if I'd known about these.

Well, the MX is a fun camera, but it seems a bit louder than I expected- a resonance can be heard after each shot. Definitely louder than an MEF.

Is this to be expected?

Mine has a "ping" noise at the end of the exposure cycle. It's just a different sort of shutter than the ME series and the sound will be different.

The MX uses a mechanical, horizontally running rubberised silk shutter. The ME series use variations on the Seiko electronic vertically running metal shutter.

Thanks, John, that's exactly the sound. I'm running a roll of old drugstore film in it now to check for light leaks, and I'm shooting it next to my Leica IIIf, which just sort of "swishes".