At 22:38 2002-11-19 +0100, Bojidar Dimitrov wrote:
The K1000 was my first SLR over 20 years ago, and I missed it so much I got one a couple of years ago. It cost me about half of what I paid for an MX a year later. The first installment gave me a solid, useable camera, the other the convenience of a small body, a DOF preview (which I find no use for) and some extra info in the finder. Not sure I would have preferred the latter when I was a student.I do not think highly of the K1000. I think that the only reason that it is (was?) so puplar with photo students is that it was cheap and available new.
Well, I have both (plus an MV-1 and my favourite, the ME Super). The continous needle meter does have its merits against LEDs, which are invisible in daylight on my MX. In darkness the LEDs are better than a needle, but then I can't see the shutter and aperture displays, which makes it less than perfect for concerts (here the ME Super rules).I do think that the lack of information is a bad thing, and I would take an MX any day over a K1000.
Perhaps one should not compare apples with oranges and instead discuss the relative merits between the MX and KX. If one can afford neither the K1000 is the only choice from that era... if one can find one without an over-inflated price (KEH sells them all for about the same price). Naturally, everybody wants an LX, but few students can afford it.
Nice to see a good thing getting better. It's always my starting reference point for checking specs for Pentax bodies.BTW, I am currently reworking the "Bodies" section of the KMP, and will soon need descriptions and subjective evaluations for all bodies.
______________________________________________________________________
Geir Aalberg http://www.aalberg.com/ http://www.fandom.no/
