Nice shot of the doodlebug. The take off ramp looks a bit short though!

I really like your third shot, a lovely intensity on the man's face.

K.

The only other common fault with the MX is that some little part somewhere gets bent and leaves the meter on continuously. As a result the batteries run flat after a few days. It is an easy repair, so I am told, and there were instructions on the web somewhere.

I'll admit that I just sent mine off and got it fixed and serviced at the same time.

K.

I admired the photo on flickr before I came across this thread here. Excellent photograph. K.

I'm afraid nothing beats practice. The K10D was my first autofocus SLR having used various film bodies since 1982...! I did, however, find fitting a good quality split screen helped enormously. I managed to pick up a Katzeye screen for my K20D.

K.

I'm not sure how the mount can be discoloured. Isn't it chromed steel? Or do you mean some other part?

K.

I'll have to try a roll...

Dunno about the autofocus. I have mainly been using it in a 1950s FED2 rangefinder...

K.

That is how I always used to meter with the ME Super when using slide film, even though it was centre weighted. Seemed to work on the whole!

K.

Until I manage to get my own darkroom that is a side of the process I am missing out on so far. My comments are largely based on commercial dev and scan and some tweaking of the scans in Lightroom (usually set the black point and tweaking the curve).

K.

Not anytime soon then!

I mentioned the KM as the nearest in spec to the K1000. I, too, prefer the KX or MX although my favourite film camera remains my LX. I've never used the K2 but that has its fans too.

At the moment I'm indulging in a little retro masochism and running a roll through my A3...

K.

The Ilford Delta range have flat "tabular grain" which makes them look smooth and fine. Unfortunately (for Ilford) many B&W film users these days like to see a bit of grain... HP5 and FP4 have been around in one form or another for ages and have a more "traditional" grain structure (although still borrow a bit of technology from colour films). Kodak Tri-X is in the same sort of class as HP5 and has a loyal following. Tri-X is also famous for being a good film to push to 1600 if necessary. Sadly, Fuji discontinued Neopan 1600. Ilford Delta 3200 is actually a 1000 ASA film, but I haven't tried it yet.

There are a few absolutely traditional silver B&W films about, especially the CHS Art range. They are slow... (e.g., 50 ASA) but rather nice and have a lovely tone and glow to them. Excellent for portraits IMHO.

XP2 Super, Kodak BW400CN and Fuji Neopan 400CN are chromogenic B&W films. That means they have to be processed in colour chemicals (C-41 process). That has the advantage that your local high street store can do them, the disadvantage that just like colour it is harder to do at home. I really like Kodak BW400CN and have used it extensively. I don't get on so well with Ilford XP2. I find it hard to say exactly why, but the images just don't seem so successful to my eyes. I haven't used the Fuji version. All these films have a wide exposure latitude and can be rated anywhere between 200 and 1600 ASA without pushing or pulling at the developing stage. Weirdly, I had much better results with the original XP1 at 1600 than I have with XP2 Super at 1600. Go figure. I find erring slightly on the side of over-exposure works well for the Kodak film and normally set my lightmeter at 320. High-street lab scans will often have a nasty colour cast (as will their machine prints which are just BW images printed onto colour film). The scans are easily fixed in the software. If you want nice BW prints, send them to a good lab.

Boots have been selling Kodak BW400CN film on a 3 for 2 offer for a while, which is a good deal. Often there isn't a notice, but it is worth asking.

Silverprint are excellent for mail order film, if not the cheapest. 7dayshop can also be good value.

Hope this helps. Kris.