KM or ME Super?

[matt_h5]

<p>Hey everyone, I'm taking an intro photography class and I'm not too happy with the lender camera they provided me with. It's a canon EOS 650, which is a nice camera, but I would really like to learn on a manual focus and be forced to learn how to use different shutter speeds and aperture settings myself.<br /> <br /> I've done a fair amount of research on MX's, KX's, KM's, ME Supers and even Super Programs. I was set on an MX, but all of the ones I find are a little outside of what I would like to spend on a camera for this class or are in rough shape. I have the opportunity to get an ME Super (body only) with new foam seals and a warranty or a KM (body only) for about the same price. I have 2 lenses that will fit them (both k-mounts right?) so I'm looking for user opinions to see which one I should get.<br /> <br /> Keep in mind I'm brand new to film photography and SLRs in general (I've only had a week and a half of classes thus far) so if you could be sure to explain the major advantages of each camera in terms I can understand that would be great. Thanks in advance.<br /> <br /> <br />A little about the class: We have to take, develop and print all of the pictures ourselves. We're using Kodak 400 ISO Tri-X B&W film and printing on Kentmere RC paper.</p>

[frank_scheitrowsky1]

<p>The KM is a rugged mechanical body with traditional dial controls. The ME Super is much smaller, electronic, and push button controlled. You have to decide which feels better to you.</p>

<p>Would you be interested in a black MX with 50f2 for $150? It needs new seals though.</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>Well the MX or the older KX are better cameras but as you said you didn't find one that fit your budget. Out of the 2 choose the KM if you want to be more manual and don't care much about the meter. The ME Super offers less convenient manual controls but has better meter.<br />So it boils down to good meter or convinient manual shutter speed.</p>

[lachaine]

<p>As a classic manual person from the actual period these cameras are supposed to be the classics from (not to mention having owned an MX and a few K's of various levels from "entry-level" to top of the line), given that it's a course, I would suggest not burdening yourself with the pitfalls of old "classic" cameras. It seems like these were new just yesterday to me, but they are actually pretty old, and contrary to popular misconception on the internet, metal or no metal, none of these cameras were built to last for decades. Can't you just set the Canon you have on manual and force yourself to set shutter speed and aperture manually?</p>

<p>If you really must, I would say the MX, KM, KX are better choices than the cameras with electronics on them. </p>

[paul_wheatland]

<p>I have K1000 with 50 f2 SMC-A at $125 and ME Super with 50 f2 SMC-A at $100 and both cameras need nothing, ready to go. E mail me off list for shipping(lower 48 USA only) and payment instructions. K1000 only depends on battery for metering otherwise full range of speeds and f stops. ME Super is battery dependent. Both cameras are in excellent condition. I'm in Eastern Massachusetts...........both cameras are Asahi Pentax workhorses, great for student photography and after. The "A" series lenses are desirable on Pentax DSLR's albeit manual focus.</p><div></div>

[walter_degroot]

<p>I have an me super and it is very different from any other camera I have used,.<br>

controls are so different<br>

I amso have a Ricoh K mount<br>

look at the Kr5 and kr10<br>

similar to the pentax K1000<br>

but a metal shutter and led metering<br>

no issued with any pentax lens not fitting.<br>

( mechanical only) very light like the me super<br>

but with easily adjusted Knobs.<br>

it is not a pentax but my ricoh K was $25.00 including shipping.<br>

the me super was a gift.</p>

[cliffmanley]

<p>Why doesn't someone GIVE this guy a camera. You Guys trying to sell stuff on here are way out of line. Put it in the classifieds if you want to. We give cameras away here, so someone cough up a good body for Matt. I'm sure he will donate something back in Due Time!</p>

[gnashings]

<p>Cliff is RIGHT. I would happily give one of my cameras away, but I don't have any that fit the bill. Besides, this is not a classified forum, I find attempts to peddle your crap on here to be in poor taste aside from violating forum rules.</p>

[mukul_dube]

<p>All right, many of them did last. I use a Leica M3 from 1956 and a Leica III from 1937. One of each. Care to tell me the total production of these models? With sarcasm, if you wish.</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p><a rel="nofollow" href="../photodb/user?user_id=5911856">Pierre Lachaine</a><a rel="nofollow" href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub9.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/1roll.gif" alt="" /></a>, Jul 19, 2011; 07:53 p.m.<br />. . . and contrary to popular misconception on the internet, metal or no metal, none of these cameras were built to last for decades.<br>

Plastic or metal I have cameras from the 70's and 80's and my age is in the mid 50 and I am afraid that my cameras will outlive me. It depends on the condition when you get them and how you treat them.</p>

 

[lachaine]

<p>I have two 35mm cameras from the 1960's that work fine except that one has a dead meter. The other one was taken apart and rebuilt. Nevertheless, I stand by my statement that most of the so-called "classic" cameras from the 70's were merely the cheap consumer cameras of their day, and they had many questionable internal arrangements under the casing that simply were not made to last, but rather to compete. That's not to say you might not get lucky with one every once in a while.</p>

<p>Very few companies were in the business of over-engineering consumer cameras so that they would still be in use 30 or more years later, no matter how nostalgic or emotional we may feel about them. They were in the business of making good-looking cameras that would be well-reviewed in the camera press and that the middle class could afford to buy. Yes, in those days, we all believed the marketing, some of which has lived on as mythology.</p>

<p>If all an original poster needs to do is to take pictures for a course or whatever, rather than becoming a vintage camera collector, it doesn't matter what the camera is as long as it works... and a more recent camera with a manual setting works best of all.</p>

[Gus Lazzari]

<p>Matt, if you're still looking.<br>

I have a little <strong>"K" mount</strong> Vivitar manual camera outfit to ship to you.<br>

It's been fully serviced and has new batteries.</p>

<p>Contact me via email with your address, and I'll get it right out to you.</p>

<div></div>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>Some people prefer more classic dials vs. the ME Super's up/down buttons but the buttons work pretty well with the drawback that you can' t tell what you set unless you're looking in the viewfinder at the time. With the dial you can see what you're setting as you turn the dial. In a KX or MX you can see in the viewfinder as well but with a KM you won't know the speed if you change it while at eye level. Super Program had a small LCD on the top panel so you'd get both.</p>

<p>With KM vs. KX you give up in-viewfinder aperture & shutter display and mirror lockup. Cameras are otherwise similar. With ME Super you become dependent on batteries for the shutter, gain 1/2000 shutter with 1/125 X-sync, aperture-priority autoexposure, but lose DoF preview. It's also more compact and boasts a bigger/brighter viewfinder than the KX/KM. I also don't love the LED array readout for the metering as you can't really see how many steps off you are when metering manually--you only get 'over' and 'under' but not whether it's 1 stop vs. 3 stops, etc. Super Program has ME Super-like button ergonomics, gains back the DoF preview, uses a full LCD display for shutter speed and in manual mode shows +1, -2, etc., and has a more comfortable little plastic finger grip and also offers TTL flash and shutter-priority autoexposure. Viewfinder seems pretty close to the ME series.</p>

<p>I'll mention that the cameras I used for a similar class 20 years ago were a borrowed Konica Autoreflex T3 (heavy, uses now unavailable batteries), another borrowed Pentax Program Plus (slightly downmarket Super Program), and a Pentax P3n (X-mas gift), new at the time. The P3n is actually pretty good for this purpose, one small drawback for the 'full experience' is that there's no manual ISO override, it has to use the DX encoding on the film canisters (on the positive side, you won't forget to change it when you switch from ISO 100 to 400 film).</p>

[red_robin]

<p>All good suggestions and a free camera is hard to beat. For me - well just couldn't stay away from those auto buttons. Got myself a Canon P . it's a M-39 lens mount manual camera. I put my SLR's in the cabinet and haven't looked back. Don't get me wrong, the others all have their place and uses, but for me learning this way is paying off. Good luck, Red</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>My question is why doesn't the OP turn OFF the autofocus?</p>

<p>The Canon EOS 650 has a large clear viewfinder and should do as well as most cameras for manual focus if you turn off the AF.</p>

<p>You do, of course, have to know or learn how to manually focus; but that's true of any camera from the beginning. (e.g., Google™ for tips, I had a couple of links but apparently P.net doesn't play well with the hosting site in question )</p>

[matt_h5]

<p>Gus: Thanks a lot for the generosity, i'll pm you my info asap.</p>

<p>JDM: I've been using the manual focus, but beyond that everything else is done automatically.</p>

<p>Everyone: Thanks for the thought out responses and suggestions. I got a few perspectives I hadn't thought of before.</p>

[jeff_livacich]

<p>I don't think Walter was peddling anything. I think he was just saying how little he spent on the Ricoh.</p>

[jason]

<p>i am a confirmed Pentax user! The ME-Super has a super viewfinder. Better than any camera available today. I would suggest using the Canon in full manual! I owned EOS system. It did everything it was supposed to do! In fact better! I hated it with a passion. So the choice is rather the KM than the Me-Super. The Me has the weirdest shutter setting..two(2) buttons! I find it simply easier to use it in AUTO! The Me is really tiny.<br>

The cameras unlike the Nikon-F, were made to compete. They will last a long,long time. My daughter has one of my original Spotmatic(KM with screw thread mount). It has never needed a service. I have done some minor repairs. It was used professionally for many years! Like thousands of rolls. My Leica M3 required a full shutter repair, drum, blinds etc in the same work period..The RF unit was also repaired, new parts incl masks, rangefinder beam splitter etc. So the camera that was made to "compete" certainly well constructed.<br>

Batteries are no a problem. Check the readings, mine have needed resetting the ISO scale, rather than tamper.. Read too high. Set ISO a few stops lower.<br>

Enjoy! I shot half a roll in my Leica-M and the remainder in my K-1000( cheaper KM) The negs are equal in density and sharpness. I also manged better candid moments..<br>

The one fact nobody mentioned is loading a Pentax. Make sure the film canister has slight movement and not jammed. The rest is easy. See, set needle,focus and shoot. Your negs will be easy to print.</p>

[cj8281]

<p>Jeff is right, Walter was simply stating what he paid for his camera and was not offering it for sale. Walter also states that he received the ME Super as a gift, does that mean that he is offering that for free?</p>

<p>I agree with Andrew, I have a Pentax ME Super and the over/under leds don't show how far off you are. For LED type meter in manual mode, I prefer the meter in the Minolta X370/X570 cameras, it shows you where you are and what is recommended. My favorite meters though are the type with the simple needle, the Pentax K1000 and the Nikkormats (FTn, FT2, FT3) were you center the needle, or the match the needles type used in the Minolta SRT series (101, 201, 202). With the needle(s) you can clearly see how far you are off from what is recommended and you can make your own decision on if you think it is close enough.<br>

There are many of these great cameras out there for less than $100. I bought my Nikkormat FTn for $6, (No Cliff I am not trying to sell it for $6 merely saying what I paid for it) and $20 for my Pentax ME Super (again, not for sale).<br>

The offer from Matt Lazzari, a very thoughtful and generous offering.</p>

[cliffmanley]

Just for clarification, I was not talking about Walter's comment on how much he paid for his camera. There were two other posts, trying to sell Matt cameras at stated prices, that were later removed from this post. Those are the ones I was talking about. And Congrats go to Gus for helping keep the true spirit alive and well, and helping others get started with film. I know the culture has been shaped to only think of "Self", but helping others is truly "Where It's At" I would love to see some posts instead of Look what I did, I took some great 35mm shots...... to Look what I did, I taught this guy how to use a film camera, how to take, develop, and print pictures, etc. But I think most people are too selfish with their time to care about the next guy! Good luck to you Matt and after you learn, teach someone else.