ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ก.ค. 2024
- A short review for a short camera.
SUPPORT THE CHANNEL
Paypal Direct Donation
www.paypal.me/azrielknight
Patreon
/ azriel
T-Shirts and Merchandise
teespring.com/stores/knight-l...
CONTACT ME
Official Website
www.azriel.ca
Address
Azriel Knight
PO Box 75100
Calgary, Alberta T2K 6J8
E-Mail
me@azriel.ca
SOCIAL MEDIA LINKS
Instagram
/ azrielknight
Twitter
/ azrielknight - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
I actually like the LED meter because in a dark situation you can still see it. On my OM-1 the meter can be obscured by a black needle on a dark background.
Thanks for the comment David!
Hi I
I love that shot of the stairs!
Thank you :)
These videos are fun. This was my first 35mm camera in 1979. I was 15. The "traffic lights" really did not bother me and I got so used to them that I preferred them to a needle. I eventually replaced this with an LX and then as I moved into the professional world, Nikons, This is still one of my favorite cameras of all time though. Small, and simple to use with only shutter speed, aperture and ASA to worry about instead of my camera now and it's 20 menus deep of settings.
I own one myself and it's also one of my favorite cameras to shoot with. It's either that or a Minolta X500 when I prefer to shoot with aperture priority. Sure, the traffic light metering system is a bit unusual, but, as Azriel stated, is accurate.
I bought mine in 76 and I’m 75 and still got mine went digital with canon but still prefer my mx and those lenses so sweet ‘
Azriel Knight - I just wanted to let you know how much I appreciate the era-appropriate soundtrack to this video. The foootage other than the headshots almost look like they were filmed in the 80s and I love the moving lighting work on the camera. It’s shows an incredible attention to detail in the work. I have now subscribed and am looking forward to checking out your other videos.
Thanks Dominic, appreciate that.
I’ve shot an MX a lot over the years, you’re right about how twitchy that meter is, but generally I find either of the ambers is generally as ‘right’ as the green.
Good to know! Thanks Andy!
The ambers mean half a stop of difference, red for a full stop.
What a great start to a Fourth of July weekend!!! Another masterpiece buddy!!!
Wow, thanks Ralph! Stay safe!
I remember back in the day the wow factor of the MX's meter. LEDs were exotic and a selling feature. I bought my K1000 in 1981, I still have it, and recall talking to a friend who had bought an MX he talked enthusiastically about the LED meter readout. Match needles were old hat back then and I felt my K1000 was behind the times. Now on re evaluation I prefer the K1000.
Many professional photographers used an MX as a second body. I had a friend who worked at the local paper, in the photographic department, and an MX was always kept loaded to shoot local things and as an ever ready spare, they shot Nikon most of the time FMs then FM2s. They liked the MX and it never failed them even though it was beat up, I remember seeing it, it had no case and lived on a shelf.
I bought my MX about ten years ago, I still have it. I find it just like you say in your video. The meter is a pain and I prefer match needles, the Nikon FM has a similar LED meter read out that is as sensitive. I think you would like the Pentax KX it has a full information viewfinder and a meter needle, blue, that is set in relation to the shutter spee indicator needle, black. The KX is a camera I favour over the MX and iso goes from 6 to 6400 on the meter. The KX has everything a manual camera can have, it is like a refined K1000. The MX is like a shrunk KX.
Thanks for the trip down memory lane Richard. I think this time of LED metering has aged like milk, but I see why people would have loved it. Thanks for the comment.
I've owned the MX for years. My FAVORITE thing about this camera is the light meter! It's so EASY to understand!
Awesome!
The MX was my second camera after starting out with a Zenit E in the the early 70s. The MX meter was never a problem as far as I was concerned, and I was shooting on mainly Kodachrome and Ektachrome back then.
Even with the optional drive attached, the MX is still a small camera.
The ISO setting range wasn't an issue because I only shot at ISO / ASA 25, 64, 200 on Ektachrome / Kodachrome and 50 with Velvia. 400 was the highest in B&W.
Thanks for sharing John!
I really enjoy your your videos-thanks for the hard work.
Thanks Allan :)
I think you were very honest and straight forward. You made it clear that your concerns on the light meter were your concerns. And, to be honest, you were right on the finicky issue. However, you do (or at least I did) get use to using it. I have many vintage 35mm cameras from this era and all have their pros and cons. I bought mine because I am going to do a comparison between the MX, the Olympus OM-1, and the Nikon FM. All relatively small, all mechanical and good performers. In my opinion, this is a much better camera overall than the K-1000 (my only other Pentax camera) for a few reasons.
Anyway, I didn’t mean to get so long winded,. Great video
The MX is my favourite Pentax. I have K1000. ME SE. ME Super and the MX. I also have 4 Canon AE1+Ps ( my primary shooters ). The K Mount Lenses are great and a little familarisation between bodies doesn't take long to adjust to. I really enjoy the ME from time to time. The K1000 - just as wonderful as the MX.
I just got mine yesterday and it feels amazing in my hands, I don't find the light metre annoying at all though, it seems quite helpful. I guess I will see more after I get my shots developed.
Thanks for this video. I have an MX, and know what you are talking about with the jumpy light meter. I have a good external light meter if really worried about exposure, but my technique is to enjoy practicing the Sunny 16 Rule and setting up the shutter speed/aperture before checking what the MX thinks. If the meter shows I’m way off (shadows, etc) then I correct and get the light meter within one LED or so. It seems to work for me, and any over exposure has so far been within the parameters of correcting when scanning.
Bought an MX new in 1979 and another second hand body when I could afford it - one was always loaded with K-64 and the other with HP5. My lenses now also get used also on my K-x and I'm considering a KIII mono. I've just got to sneak it by the domestic accountant... Light meter - I like it.
Nice review Azriel...have a nice weekend!
Thanks very much, you too :)
Hey Azriel, I think I bought the exact MX featured in this video from you about a month ago! I've been having a blast with it, I mostly carry it around as a small "B" camera when I'm out with my medium format setup, as well as for adapting my Soviet M42 lenses. With a M42-K adapter, I'm able to use stop-down metering with this camera. Speaking of which, the meter can be a bit indecisive at times, but whenever that happens I just make sure the upper yellow LED is lit to overexpose a little bit since negative films handle a little overexposure just fine.
I adore it for its small size and mechanical operation, so I think the MX has earned its place on my regular rotation of cameras :)
Glad it's working out for you :)
wow, you have really look at the highlights and shadows of your scene for proper exposure w/ the light meter
I use tri-x with sunny 16 so exposure error of +- 1 stop isn't big of a deal and I can shoot without the LEDs of the light meter that I find distracting.
2 other cons for me are:
The matte part of the focusing screen gets a bit grainy with slow lenses
The shutter speeds knob seems to be a bit hard to rotate.
For colors or more precision I use the nikon but it's really fun camera and I really like the viewfinder magnification
I've used a number of Pentax MX since 1989, can't say I recognise your description of the light meter however. It certainly feels small in the hand compared to cameras from the late 80s onwards, but it's a quality bit of kit!
Someone else was saying it was a quality build. I tend to agree.
Nice video! I know its lightmeter is subject of complains, but I personally got used to it. It's basic, it's simple. Exactly as I like it to be. The most important thing is to understand how your equipment works. Once you master it, you get the most out of it.
Had one from new bought it in 1976 , yep I’m an old guy and hang on to quality kit . Ps and the 😊 Pentax lenses
I have a Pentax KX and I absolutely love the viewfinder. Moving to an AE-1 and not being able to check my aperture or shutter speed when I had it up to my eye really hampers the shooting experience. Sadly I need to get it CLA'd to shoot with it again, but I always feel like the viewfinders in this gen of Pentax SLRs were great (but that LED light meter in the MX looks gross)
I just ordered one of the waiting for it to arrive. Preciously shot film in 80s however it was a crappy 110 point and shoot. Stepping into film from digital.
I enjoy mine. I actually like the light meter. I move the center to get my best exposure set it then compose for focus. The LEDs are good for my older eyes. The small size is my bother when holding with a longer lens. I had a grip 3D printed and its a great now. The Pentax M glass is small and fantastic. Thanks for the video.
Hey no prob Jamie, to each their own :)
My favorite Pentax.
great first impressions video. That seems like a really dope camera and totally about that meter. Sometimes with these old cameras i just use an external meter i know works. The cams usually always work but these dang meters just go out. Dont trust em.
Add the winder to make the body more comfortable to hold for larger or arthritic hands. While the winder I have is fully functional (but wow, that battery door design is crummy), I think you can opt to NOT use the winder and continue to lever wind and use the on-camera shutter release.
It's been a hot minute since I've used my MX but if memory serves, its view is 100% and if using a 50mm lens you can work with both eyes open when tracking objects. Think of the examples of race cars that look sharp and frozen while the background is a streaky blur. Further, I don't recall having the sort of twitchy metering problems you describe.
Should I go with Pentax K1000 or MX? planing to buy FIlm camera
I also have Canon QL17, AE 1 and Canon Demi EE17 in my list
I need help on what should I Get
My Rolleiflex 2.8 GX has a similar meter, and I kinda learnt to like it after a while. It seems to be pretty intuitive to use when you want to balance metering between highlights/shadows in a zone system sort of way.
Great video though, I love some of these photos.
Thanks very much. Yeah I mean if it wasn't so similar to another camera I like, it'd be something to get over, but given the option...
I regularly shoot with my MX. I also shoot an F3 and the i get massive enjoyment out of both. Both incredibly well built. The meter can take some getting used to. Great in low light. Awesome m series primes make for a fanstastic small set up and i dont struggle with my large hands.
Good to know about the hands. I do love me some Pentax primes. Thanks for the comment.
I think your meter's jitteryness comes from the aperture linkage potentiometer being filthy. It might get better if you exercise the f/stops back and forth in the hopes of dislodging any grime
*EDIT*
I opened one up for myself and my guess was wrong. what's actually causing this are two large foam pads
that cushion two meter circuits against the pentaprism from the lid. the pads rot over time, and the small but present moisture in the glue from the pads gets on the potentiometers that control the meter's sensitivity and corrode them. these cameras have two cells that work together to average light collected in the finder. I think only one of yours are currently affected
I had a few others complain about their own meters acting similar, but who knows. These are antiques.
@@AzrielKnight it's a shame that the rotting foam causes at least three function flaws with this camera, it would've been my daily K body. Now I use a super-A
The led light meter could be annoying for some people, but it could be just a personal issue. I oftenly use a K1000 and an MX without batteries and a hand-held light meter. Just getting to know how your camera and film behave after a couple of rolls of testing, will make you understand in-camera light meter reading is just a reference point. Your eyes and experience is the best light meter in fact. A pentax mx is a nice little camera indeed.
after about a year with ME Super this traffic light in the view finder was a natural thing for me. Intuitive and simple. maybe it's just me...
Not sure I could hack that wonky meter either. Then again, it's not the only camera to use LEDs, such as the Canon AE-1's flashing recommended aperture only or the Bronica' ETRSs AE-II metered prism showing recommended shutter speeds in full stops only.
what about the focusing screen? is it the split image type or the microprism like a canon ftb, btw love the video!!
Thanks for the question, I believe it's split image.
I bought a cheap MX a while ago when I was looking to upgrade on the ME Super and Super Program I had. I really wanted to like it, the issues were hard to overlook. My main problems with the camera were the extremely stiff shutter dial making it hard to change while looking through the viewfinder, and the traffic light metering being too limited in it's range meaning that you're 'blind' when out by more than a stop. I eventually found an LX for a good price (although it did need a CLA in the end) , which has a viewfinder display that takes the best of both the LED and needle systems.
If your shutter speed dial was that stiff it is not an issue with the MX in general it's an issue specific to the body you had. I've been using my fathers MX that he bought in 1981 since 1996 and it's been a workhorse.
I have an MX with a 'jumpy' light meter. I think it can be an issue with age. On a camera repair forum one guy suggested to replace a contact inside but it was a little too involved for me to attempt it. So I will live with it. Otherwise it's one of my favorite cameras.
Yeah it didn't seem right.
I've owned many MXs over the years (starting in the late 70s) and currently own 4. I never found the meter to be a problem. Its viewfinder is maybe the best I've ever used with film. The combining of the shutter speeds with the meter LEDs is perfect. Compare it to a Nikon FM... where the shutter speeds are on the left and meter LEDs on the right, trying to see both wearing glasses is impossible. With the MX, I don't have this problem. As for size, I appreciate the compact body, and if I want something bigger, attach the winder. Finally the MX is really well built and rugged. Much better than the LX IMO. I find the ME and ME Super to vastly inferior. What else? DOF preview coupled with the self timer is a great design, interchangeable focus screens (something the Nikon FM doesn't have), 2 fps winder and 5 fos motor drive and a 250 exp back. Did I mention Gallium Arsenide photobdiodes that give great sensitivity range... Yeah the MX has them. My perfect 35mm camera...but to each his own.
I love my MX, meter doesn’t bother me it’s pretty accurate. My Leica M6 has a similar stop light metering I guess its just personal preference. Keeping mine for sure.
I've used it for street photography and landscapes and think it's a great camera but agree about the light meter. If I'm shooting street stuff I just take the battery out and use sunny 16 instead because the lights flickering in the corner are annoying. I've found the meter it to be accurate when shot from a tripod but I usually just use an external meter then.
Good on you for not relying on a light meter.
I mainly use K-Pentaxes (K1000, KM, KX K2), an LX and a few Ms (MX and 2 MEs). I love all of them, but I must admit, I really like the MX. It is tiny, simple to use and very robust. And once you got used to the light meter, it works perfectly in every situation. The limited ASA range has never been an issue for me because I don't like those extremely grainy superfast films anyway...
I think the main advantages compared to me super are that it has fully mechanical shutter not depending on battery (i usually expose by Sonny 16 rule or use external light meter), and that it has a proper shutter dial
Thanks for the comment :)
Love my MX but I don't use the meter only seems to work if I have the camera set to 1/500 haha it has an awesome viewfinder! The most ridiculous meter I have used has to be my Rolleiflex SL350!
Thanks for the feedback :)
I want to upgrade my K-1000, really I do. But, I love with the matchstick meter and improving my Sunny-16, it feels great in the hand and is reliable, I can still get DOF preview with M42 lenses or unscrew a K mount lens, if I every shoot scene with mirror lockup I'm probably bringing out a medium format camera.
The K-1000 is solid. Don't feel pressured to change that up if it works!
Azriel, I like the full scale end result that most of your image examples display. enjoyable, and they show pleasing texture.
I have 2 copies of the mx. I haven't been shooting as I am refining my development process, and, for consistency, I am test shooting with spotmeter of nikon F100.
About the MX, I really like the brightness and view of the viewfinder in the MX. My eyes are not great, and I am able to get accurate focus because of the brightness of that screen.
As I get more knowledgeable about film exposure, I expect that I will not necessarily be reliant on any in-camera metering as I hope to already know what settings I am after. (experience will tell. I am hopeful that I will reach that stage)
That is a very kind compliment, thank you.
Working without a meter is an ambitious goal. If you have a solid math background, you're probably going to be fine.
I've seen you do shoots with the K 24mm 3.5 on this channel. Do you also have the K 28mm 3.5?
I've sold most of my Pentax glass. I just have a 35mm left.
@@AzrielKnight which version? Also what made you decide to sell the rest?
I'm a MX fan boy, I own 2. The meter style doesn't bother me and as you say it's accurate. My only neg is it's positive. The small body makes it a little tough to grip with a long or heavy lens. Pentax - A 35-105mm in talking about you. The matching M lenses are pretty darn good and adapt them to my fuji cameras. Great series, thanks.
Thanks for the comment Jamie.
I absolutely agree about the light meter and the d.o.f preview is pretty much pointless 😂
The viewfinder is great though and split prism focusing is great.
It also fits in my bicycle jersey pocket! 🚴♂️
Well, one thing is that I took it out in the pouring rain, and it lived to tell the tale. I may keep it around for extreme weather.
Awesome review dude
What music did you use for this video?
I licence my music from epidemicsound.com and soundtripe.com
I have one of those. I've never been bothered by the meter. The thing that says with me after every time I use it is that the body could be a tad bigger. Nice video. Cheers.
maybe you could find a grip accessory attachment that would be more ergonomic.
I have a few nikons with this type of accessory.
Cameradactyl does grips.
I really love the Pentax MX. It's the only Pentax K mount camera that I've hung on to over the years. Love that it's so small and light, and love that it's basically all mechanical, save for the meter. Match needle would be nice, but not a dealbreaker for me. I have a loathing for the ME and ME super though. I detest their controls!
The LX looks wonderful, but it seems to have sophisticated construction, so can become an expensive doorstop once it no longer functions. not worth it unless buying brand new. (Unfortunately, they don't make them any more.)
I am not a fan of the buttons on the ME Super anymore either.
I concur with all that you say. I bought the MX after the ME Super and would carry both bodies. If I was using only one body it was the the MX every time simply because of the button controls on the Super. I also changed the focusing screen on the MX for a plain screen.
I liked the ME super but it had some fatal shutter failure issues that I experienced with three different bodies over the years. Like you I held on to my MX.
I believe Nikon FM also had LED meter display. And it is easier to see in low light situation. I like needle type display but I gotta admit it sometimes hard to see in dimmer light.
Someone else mentioned this. Now I want to get a hold of one.
@@AzrielKnight My FM used to drive me nuts ! Finally gave it away
I have a FM and it's a 3 LED stop-light meter but with no yellow lights. Just 3 reds and sometimes you get two to light up as the "almost there!" indication. Not a fan.
The Nikon FM only has 3 LEDs, so I tend to overexpose by half a stop if the meter is being funny. I really do like the K1000's matchstick meter.
I would be curious to see an FM now. With only three I bet I'll hate it.
HP5+ @1600 is black and white perfection in my book.
I quite enjoy that combo :) Which developer?
If I cant see the LED meter in my camera lens what does this mean?
I would double check the manual to see if there's a way to turn it off. If not, dead battery or dead display.
Most annoying exposure meter you say? Guess my Olympus E-300 can take that spot. Similar problems to what you had here, slight movement in high contrast scenes completely throws it off sometimes
The prime lens and 49mm tip should be taken as an absolute. I have several variable lenses and they are all a pain in the neck for one reason or another. These things are also stupid expensive on Ebay. You can get a very good ME super for less than half the money. One last thing, dont count on the Fstop window at the top of the viewfinder, the glue after all these years has turned into something else, one bump and you have a camera that rattles and no f stop in the viewfinder. I have repaired a couple of other cameras with these little windows and while its a relatively easy fix, its even easier if you were born with three arms. Thanks for the video.
lol, thanks for the tip
I liked the MX a lot, though I had an ME Super well before getting the MX so used it far more.
Ignoring my bias for very basic cameras, I would say the ME Super is the better choice.
I would agree except the ME Super is more prone to breaking.But given that both are mint, ME Super all day.
I have both an MX and an ME super that I was given by my Father and Grandfather respectively and I did enjoy the ME Super but unfortunately they develop shutter problems and most of them these days are broken or on the way to being broken. the original one I had developed a slow shutter then the two other ones I bought on the used market both eventually developed the same problem. Because of the electronics involved with the ME super the repair cost was quite high and it wasn't worth fixing them because it cost a lot more than buying another used one. Meanwhile I still use the same MX today and it works as well as it did when I got it in 1996. It did get a CLA once since I've owned it and the film take-up mechanism did need to be replaced once but other than that it's been worry free. For me the best Pentax 35mm bodies of this era are the K1000, the MX, and the LX.
That 80's like music gives me chills every time... after all, I grow up in the 80's 😊
Fofoto
Hi first impressions of a Canon EF, would be great!
I'll keep my eyes peeled!
@@AzrielKnight thanks for answering! regards
Try the 50mm F 1:1.2 lense.
$$$ :)
Wow.... As a Pentax follower for many years I've got to accept that I've never owned a MX... yeah I know, shame on me! A mechanical Pentax which is even smaller than my ME super sounded as my dream camera, but had always thought that its lightmeter was a needle one! I do love my K1000 and its rustic flavor, but of course after using the ME super for a while it feels bulky and heavy, but the electronic shutter and the crazy leds of the ME super have never allowed me place it as the dream camera... If Pentax had put the needle lightmeter in the MX, even without having had one in my hands I would still consider it the one to go for...
man, an MX with a needle would be a K1000 killer, thanks for the comment!
The MX was WAY better built than the ME or Super. The top plate is metal compared to the coated plastic on the other two. Don't sweat the meter! It's a brilliant reliable workhorse.
It did feel like a good build.
Most annoying viewfinder -and camera really- I have ever tried must be the Chinon Pocket zoom.. it is a cheap (I hope) point and shoot camera from the 90s. The viewfinder is so small and dark that you can barely see what you are aiming at, and thr placement makes it difficult to quickly find it. I am probably a bit biased here. I tried it out on a video not long ago, and I also wrote a rather snide entry about it in my blog. I ended up giving the camera to a charity shop.
Pentax Spotmatic and Olympus OM-1 do the wild thing = Pentax MX.
lol
Craziest meter: my contarex. Why? It works. Most of them don't, and repairing the meter or anything on a contarex, is a lesson in German engineering.
I stay with my other..... Nikons, Prakticas,...Olympus...
:D
Pentax K1000, MX & LX. : )
All great cameras :)
I've been using my fathers MX since 1996 and the meter shouldn't be jumping all over the place like you describe. When the meter is working it is way better than the simple needle imo. You have all the info at your disposal in the viewfinder the lights let you make an informed decision based on that information. Also If you need to meter beyond 1600 you just have to adjust by one stop in your head, no big deal. Actually I can't think of many cameras that metered beyond 1600asa at that time. The MX is truly a workhorse. just a touch of constructive criticism It's a little ridiculous to take a thrift store camera that hasn't been CLA'ed and then do a camera review based on your experience with it.
I would love for this channel to be able to afford to review nothing but CLA'd mint cameras.
The most annoying light meter I've ever used is the one of Yashica FX-D
Thanks for sharing :)
I almost getting a weak spot for Pentax.
heh, I am still a big fan
Pentax is incredible!
I have a k1000 and I love the camrea....Sorta. The lense is super sharp and is easy to focus but the light meter sucks. It's ether over exposes or under exposes way too much. It's all over the place. Most of the time it does get some decent shots but at least a third of the roll is messed up. My canon a1 does a way better job at exposing, Its super accurate, But it just doesn't have the same build quality. Mabye once I buy a external light meter I will start using the k1000 again.
Just a thought... do the shutter speeds, or the various aperture openings appear accurate? (each lens might be different in giving accurate aperture) It is worth ruling out these two factors as well as an inaccurate meter. these cameras/lenses are getting older, some are seniors and my have aging mechanical problems that are common :)
Hi nice beard. :)
Thanks very much :)
I've wanted an MX... But yeah. It's way small.
itty bitty :)
The worst light meter --> Nikomat! Some kind of way engineers decided that in Nikomat underexposed (-) must be up and overexposed (+) down. So if you are get used to Pentax KM, MX, K1000..., Nikon FM, FM2, Olympus OM1 and many other cameras than this camera light meter will break your brains! That's why I will be happy to sell it incl. the 50mm f2 lens.
lol, thanks for the warning :)
@@AzrielKnight Another weird light meter found in Nikons F4 DP-20 viewfinder. It is very sensitive on smallest light changes especially if your camera is not on a tripod and you are not shooting in the studio. Besides all that its light meter looks like this: + . . . l . . . - so yes, plus on the left and minus on the right. Maybe for someone it is okay, but I have get used to DSLRs and mirrorless cameras that - is on the left and + on the right side and it takes some time to get used to it. 😉 I bet that I already done several shots underexposed instead of over exposed 😆
Sorry but that was so repetitive and unclear, any system either works, ie actually gives you the correct reading or it doesn’t, but cameras of this age in todays modern tech, is non comparable and you also have the choice of light meters and reliability, size does matter and comparing this to say cars, the pioneers in these like The mini are still desirable today, I wonder if the classics of today, will be around in 40 years or be collectable, for a start the electronics will fail and for all the bells and whistle’s if is broke, at least with the Pentax and cameras of the pre digital period, they will always be fixable, especially with 3d printing.
Foot note, who says vinyl is dead? Plus what goes around, comes back into fashion, but you can’t repurpose electronics!
A correct exposure is very subjective but I prefer a meter that will give me a reading is terms of f stops rather than traffic lights, and no, I don't want to use a handheld meter with a 35mm slr. However accurate it is compared to modern is irrelevant as I will be able to compensate for its idiosyncrasies after repeated use.
@@AzrielKnight Hi I think we are either misunderstanding each other or something is being lost, the lights change to the input, so adjust the aperture and the lights adjust, far better than a floppy needle that responds differently when power in battery drops and can give incorrect readings, where as if the batteries aren’t sufficient to activate the lights, then it won’t give a reading, the light meter comment i understand, why have such a beautiful small camera to then carry a light meter, however the photographers of the past, had ones round their necks like a necklace, tiny things, but I get your drift on that, the idiosyncratic aspect, well that seems to defeat the accuracies of your comment, on one hand your saying you want the accuracy that gives you f stops, it’s pretty easy if your adjusting and take the stop as half the previous up or down as the and equally the speed, then as always the iso is your last choice.
Like cars again, we all get used to how they handle, especially when dealing with classic vintage.
I think we agree that these were and still are cracking cameras that slow you down and make you think, so as with today’s world, my comment was that advance isn’t always beneficial, but into todays throw away culture, we are seeing what those consequence are.
There are two massive companies in the world that produce washing powder, is the world better for it? The basics pass on to the washing machine manufacturer both are still pumping out better and more improved products, yet the best for the planet is lower temperature reliable machines, that spin the items so less drying ie temperature is required to dry, and you have less waste etc, etc, etc, is that going to happen? No! Why, because of human greed and vanity, or the desire to be different and make more money.
My dad used to use a tin of water to lay slabs as you call them, paving slabs, paths! I asked him why? Water will always find its own level, and it’s also incompressible, unlike air, let’s remember where we’re came from and where we want to end up.