Pentax MX Review with Sample Photos, Use, Tips, and Tricks

[@germanboy5392]

I still have the MX my Mom bought me from Dodd Camera in 1976....was $330....adjusted for inflation that's about $1500......wow........I can't believe my Mom spent that much on me......I really dreamed of being a professional photographer at 13....still have my darkroom equipment in her attic.....she just passed away at 90....so the camera and equipment hold much sentimental value.....seems like yesterday I was standing with my Mom at counter testing the MX....Olympus and Canon AE....she was only 47......now I'm 10 years older than that!! Time is cruel...

[@DavidHancock]

I hear you on that. I'm older than my folks were when they got me my first camera, too. I hope that the MX and darkroom gear can still get some use from time to time.

[@fil684]

I'm 24 and i've just got a pentax mx for 100 euros - i'm happy that I can be a part of these memories

[@wvideoyahoodk]

Had an MX. Changed to Leica M6 in 1996. Just bought a MX to my daughter. Can´t wait to feel it again. So incredible tough and took beautiful pictures. Soon it's back in the family. I love my Leica - but the MX ..........🙂

[@DavidHancock]

Completely agree. These are beautiful cameras.

[@arthurserino2254]

The MX must be the most capable manual SLR ever made. Data back, power winder, FP and X flash sync, plus shutter and aperture indication inside the viewfinder! Not to mention the world's largest selection of compatible lenses, even more if you use the screw-mount adapter.

[@DavidHancock]

It's up there. I think a good case could be made for the FM2 or FM3A, though.

[@johngreenwood1972]

Had one since about 81. This is the camera I learnt photography on. Started with an all singing n dancing one and quickly changed it to the MX. No longer in use, but still a joy to own and hold. I'm going back to basics again after long lapse and have an X100F on order.

[@DavidHancock]

Nice! I know someone with an X100F and he loves it. He was a Nikon shooter and now won't go back to Nikon because the X100F is so much simpler.

[@mikeemerson9832]

An excellent camera with a few caveats. The film advance can be fragile owing to cheaper quality steel used in the gearing. The gears can wear rapidly and spares are becoming very difficult to find. What i've done is fit the auto winder to take the stress off the film advance lever. The main weakness with auto winder is the battery compartment door snapping. The integral wheel bracket inside the door can snap off due to a poor design and the plastic getting brittle over time. I've also heard of the thread stripping. Apart from that a really nice camera to use. Maybe not as smooth to operate as a Nikon FM2 but a fun camera all the same.

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you. Those are good observations that aren't widely know.

[@thecaveofthedead]

I totally hear you on the different design philosophies. The Pentax is really just a KX made smaller. So I'd imagine coming to it late, and especially after working with an Olympus OM, it would see like an ergonomic nightmare. But grow up with it, of course, and that feels really inconsequential. It's tiny. It's beautiful. It has an outrageously huge viewfinder. It's a real gem. If I was forced to choose only one camera, film or digital, it'd be my MX which I've been using since 1994. Saying that, I really want to get an Olympus OM2N and be able to use both.

[@DavidHancock]

Side by side, they're a fascinating experience.

[@ShawneeUnion]

This is amazing. Your editing, story and style are really seamless here. I'm going to "borrow" that video to still shot. Great work.

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you. The video-to-still transition is pretty easy, technically. The hard part is remembering which shot is which. The easiest way to do it is to get a horizontal flash bar (that should come with two 1/4-20 screws on it) and a $3 smart phone tripod mounting clip. The smart phone goes on one end of the flash bar and the camera on the other. Placing the smart phone camera's lens next to the camera's lens minimizes parallax.

[@UnixSystemV]

I'm about to buy my first 35mm film camera and I've found an MX in very good condition. I'll use it with my existing K mount lenses (which I've used on my K10D) and I've found your video very encouraging to buy that body. I've been thinking about an ME, ME Super or Super A, but then I realized that I love to have full control, therefore a manual camera is all the best for me. Seeing your shots, I now KNOW, that this is THE film camera for me. Thank you!

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you and fantastic choice. This is a much better option than the other three you were considering just in terms of robustness and interface simplicity,

[@fxvsdx35]

Nice video David. The credit for these great photos goes to you, the photographer, not the camera. The camera is just a dumb tool. It is the skill of the person behind it to make the photo. Give yourself a pat on the back, you deserve it !!!!!!!

[@DavidHancock]

Jay John Thank you very much!

[@robmansax]

For me and what I need and expect from an SLR the Pentax MX is the best camera body ever made. Incidentally, alongside Leitz and Zeiss lenses I love Pentax SMC too so after having tried dozens of cameras and lenses combinations I now use only Pentax MXs with Pentax 50mm 1.7 or 1.4 and for a light and more portable RF Cameras Leicas III or IIIb with Collapsible Summicron f2 or Elmar red scale f3.5 50mm.

[@DavidHancock]

Good choices! I do like my iiib, too. Great camera.

[@bwellington3001]

I recently bought an MX. it's functional unit and i suspect it was probably maintained because the light seals dont look like they are falling apart, mirror and shutter dont lock up either, manageable dirt in viewfinder and pictures from my first roll turned out to be clean. All i had to do is clean the battery compartment for light meter to function without glitches. I really hope it wont just suddenly fall apart on me!

[@DavidHancock]

Nice and I think you'll be in good shape with it.

[@jonathanoldbuck3246]

In my 50+ years of photography, the MX is one of the most useful cameras to be in my hands. Additionally, many of the Pentax lenses are absolutely stunning quality, at least for a B&W shooter. Have had mine about 30 years, never a single burp ... waiting to hear a digital shooter say that ...

[@DavidHancock]

:D

[@xahldera]

I've already commented on the MX video manuals, but here's my 2 cents/pence. The MX is a lovely camera but I feel it is a little too small for my hands. I prefer the size and weighting of my K1000 but I admit I'm biased as I have large, clumsy hands. The MX's smaller size does mean it is easier to stuff into a bag where space is limited, so very handy for those situations where I have to travel light.

[@DavidHancock]

It is fantastic as a light travel camera for sure. I agree fully with that.

[@tuisitala9068]

I bought my first SLR, a ME Super in 1980. 2 years later I bought my MX. The ME Super expired 10 years ago, the MX will last for ever, properly serviced. My 1982 version stills runs smoothly. This is the smallest professional quality SLR, metal bodied with a very good meter. The ergonomics are great, especially if you like really small cameras. My OM1 feels quite large compared to the MX. The LED exposure lights in the viewfinder are much better than the match needles of the OM1 or 2 or the Nikon FE. If you can find a well looked after example then do not hesitate.

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you!

[@WatchmakerErik]

For my Two-hundredths of a US dollar, I have to say that I have tried both the OM-1 and the MX, and find the MX to be superior. The OM's control layout is a tiny bit better, I guess, but the MX's meter is far far FAR easier to see. And the Pentax's controls are a little bit of a pain, but I love being able to see all the info in the finder. I think the MX is the best made, best designed 35mm manual SLR in existence.

[@DavidHancock]

It's a fantastic camera, without a doubt. for me, handling and viewfinder size are hyper important, so the OM-1 is a bit better in my eyes in those regards. But the MX has superior construction and excellent reliability.

[@AllenFreemanMediaGuru]

I got a new MX back in 1976 or so......to use in college. I really loved it. I eventually got a back up camera the Pentax ME.....but the ME had an auto exposure feature! So it became my #1. I had a darkroom and processed black and white. In 1999 I went digital and even though it was not up to par yet......I never looked back. But will never forget how great the MX looked (the black body) and worked.

[@AllenFreemanMediaGuru]

Great job DH! There is always the story of the chef that baked a fantastic cake. But was only asked...what brand of oven do you use? So, yes, it's the photographer not the camera but we can still wax poetic over some of our favorites! In college in the 70's I had a photography class and was using a camera my dad gave me. Kodak Retina II. It was from the early 50's --if not older than that. It was all manual, even to the point of guessing the distance to the subject. (That was how you focused!) My mom felt sorry for me the 2nd year and bought me a black Pentax MX. To me it was like going from a Volkswagen Beetle to a Ferrari. Years later I got a ME Super (with Auto exposure!). Other than the winding mechanism going out on the MX, (I shipped it to NY where they promptly fixed it.) these cameras were work horses!

[@mikeemerson9832]

The only weak point on the MX was the winder mechanism. The pawls on the winder shaft are quite fragile and can break. Also the auto winder battery compartment door wheel bracket can snap. Other than that a very nice camera.

[@csb65536]

I may have missed something. I thought you said the MX was NOT in your top 10 Pentax cameras list, yet you do recommend it. Being #11 at best and still getting a recommendation says a lot about you positive view of Pentax cameras. Did I mis understand? Either way, nice review!!

[@DavidHancock]

Yup, I still recommend it. I think that using a camera is a very personal experience in terms of what people like a look for. I love the interface on this, but the camera is a bit too small for me to hold comfortably. But for someone who like the way this holds, it's a great camera -- reliable, accurate, and capable. So personal preference, not top ten. But I recognize that even though it's not a favorite, it's still very good.

[@izaguirreeder]

Great reviews, David! Almost poetic. I own an LX and I'm looking for an all-mechanical Pentax as well. Between the KX, MX, and the K1000, which of those do you think most closely resembles the smoothness of operation that the LX provides? Many thanks and keep your videos coming!

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you! You'll be happiest with the MX. The KX and K1000 are so much larger and heavier that they won't feel at all like your LX.

[@jocknarn3225]

used 2 havan MESuper silver-top when they were current tech early/mid-80s. That led 2 Rollieflex TLR 6x6 then interest waned till decades later I find a "working" all-black MESuper. Then I fell 4 a cosmetically beautiful LX with serious sticky mirror so start looking 4 mechanical, reliable & repairable Pentax SLR but a step up from the K-1000. I find a serviced MX + new light seals I can use my 50M/f1.4 on. The MESuper gets sold. The MX becomes my "work-horse" .. my LX my "repair project eternal".

[@DavidHancock]

:D Yeah, LXs are high maintenance. I have two.

[@CharlieFPV]

Does anyone know the lens showed in the thumbnail?

[@DavidHancock]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/aabWdnWgn6ppsK8feature=shared

[@fatherheer]

I enjoyed the video…I was curious what your top ten favorite Pentax camera list might look like…?

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you! I don't think I could get out to ten, but the LX is top. I also like the MX and S2 Super/H3V a lot.

[@AmirHamzah_MAHBAR]

Ah, MX camera. I started with ME Super then change to MX. The MX the build quality is amazing compared to ME Super that feel metal+plasticky abit(but still strong body). But the MX is the most adventure camera i ever use. Thanks to MX i learn alot and make me love photography. Now i use Pentax K-r with legacy lenses for my regular work. Just waiting for FF DSLR body now. Oh boy...Ricoh...please make it happen.

[@DavidHancock]

I have a K-r and like it quite a bit. It has really stunning image quality, too. I'll be doing a video on it at some point in the future after I get through the K-7 and K-3.

[@AmirHamzah_MAHBAR]

David Hancock Agree, i will keep K-r, the K-3 is my next target but just few days after your comment reply, the Ricoh just announce FF DSLR will be this year. I am truly happy as Pentaxian. :)

[@key2adventure]

How did you mount the 10mm? I suppose it didn’t have a K mount.

[@DavidHancock]

It does. The K mount on the APS-C and full frame camera is the same, so I just put it on and was fine with the reduced image coverage.

[@key2adventure]

@@DavidHancock Nice, I will look for that lens, I'm very fascinated by extreme wide angles - that is except the real fisheyes.

[@DavidHancock]

@@key2adventure Your better choice would be the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower 14mm f/2.8, which is a hair wider on this camera.

[@danpedroza007]

so dose the MX have a better meter than the Pentax K1000?

[@DavidHancock]

Daniel Pedroza Without a doubt. It functions differently, too, being center-weighted instead of averaging. But yes, and it is significantly more accurate and less prone to exposure shift based on excessively dare or bright areas on the image perimeters (such as the sky.)

[@danpedroza007]

i do have the k1000 really like it, but been checking out the MX.. i like that it's smaller plus i already have the lenses that i like for it. Best one... 35mm F2.8, awesome lens. Like the videos!! keep up the good work! and thanks.

[@barryjames3747]

There's one in a what you would possibly call a thrift store, I spotted yesterday. They wanted £40 for it, so I left it. I may go back and get it today after this video.

[@DavidHancock]

That's a fantastic price.

[@sparkleglitch13]

Hi David, I just got some Kodak 2383 and I have an MX - the people I bought the film from rate the film at iso 6, yet you say it's 1.6 - was that based on your own tests or advice you were given? I've not shot mine yet and don't want to mess it up :-)

[@DavidHancock]

So good question. A couple of factors come to mind, first would be age. I have no idea how old my 2383 is. So it could be a couple decades old and have lost speed. A second would be developing times. I develop my 2383 using times for TMax 100, regardless of the chemistry, and that works well. If your times for a given chemistry are longer than the same chemistry with TMax then either I'm pulling it a bunch or at 6 ISO you're pushing it a bunch. :D I haven't ever found any technical info from Kodak about the proper ISO.

[@romangomez9289]

Hey David! I've had an MX for a while now as well as a few other film bodies but I've never purchased any kind of flash for these older film cameras, is there any particular type of flash you think I should look for?

[@DavidHancock]

I use a lot of older flashes, in general. They tend to work fine on these. I would suggest going for a nicer Vivitar -- they made fantastic flashes. Get one that has an articulating flash head, preferably both rotating and up-down. Look for one with manual flash power control. That will be important for preventing over-powered flashing since these cameras have no TTL flash control. Something like a Vivitar 283 or 285 works very well.

[@thegreatvanziniphotos5976]

Back in the day I used a Vivitar??? 285? 283? Off camera. Of course back then it was with a cord. No probs though. Oops. Just saw David's remark. ,,, what he said!

[@mike.thomas]

Very nicely done. You put a lot of effort into this, and it shows. Your images looked great, too. I'm not that knowledgeable about the Pentax brand, to be honest. I gave a Pentax ME kit away on my channel some time ago, without ever using it. I wonder whether it had the same metering tech. It was a pretty nice little camera, but the MX was king, from what I read.

[@DavidHancock]

Mike Thomas Thank you. I've been working on various parts of this video for about six months. I don't know if the other M bodies had the arsenic oxide meter or not. The MX is, in all the important ways, not an M body. It doesn't have the same chassis, construction, interface, or operation. But my MG has equally well metered images, so I don't know if has the same metering system or not.

[@ThePaulCDickie]

David Hancock I thought the reference to arsenic oxide looked a bit wrong as I could not recall seeing anything of the sort when I bought my MX bodies (both black!) in 1982. I have checked with the camera manual and, sure enough, the meter cells were stated to be SPD - Silicon Photo Diodes. Of course, that does not explain the composition of the diodes or the substances with which the silicon was "doped". Yes, it does feel a bit small if one has been used to handling larger cameras, but that is easily fixed by fitting the auto-winder or, if one can afford all the batteries it takes, the 5 fps motor-drive.

[@yashwinning]

Does the MX have aperture priority or any auto exposure feature? I'm looking for a film camera that has aperture priority so I can worry more about framing and focusing rather than wasting time getting my exposure right manually.

[@DavidHancock]

It's only a full manual camera. The K2 has aperture priority mode and would be worth looking at.

[@michaelcrowleysphotography4274]

Nice Pictures!

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you!

[@fred8816]

Such a great review! Thank you! Would you at any point do a video on the Contax RTS? :)

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you! If I can ever get my hands on an RTS, I will. I've tried but they're always out of reach for me.

[@TheGreatLoco]

I disagree with the ergonomics comments, it seems to me it has best ergonomics of any manual SLR ever, though the AF Limited 77mm is not the best lens for the MX. Instead would recommend the Pentax-M 50mm 1.4, for example.

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you! That is an easier to use lens with this camera for sure.

[@gordonblues843]

I really don't understand the appeal of the K1000, when there is an MX.

[@DavidHancock]

The MX is a bit small for some people, myself included. That said, it's a lot easier to carry than a K1000. Back in the day when the MX was significantly more expensive than the K1000, it made a lot more sense for photographers on a budget to get the K1000.

[@MrByrd-ep5pd]

I must disagree entirely with the author's comment about ergonomics. The MX handles better than *any* camera I have ever used. I own two MXs. I use them on a regular basis; and I find it (them) the best handling camera I have ever used.

[@DavidHancock]

That's fair. I wouldn't argue with anyone else loving the way this camera feels. I've grown to like it more over the years.

[@NeverToBeSeenAgain]

Can't the LX measure 6 stops down?

[@DavidHancock]

+Matthew Towne Do you mean in terms of the compensation dial or in terms of minimum readable exposure value?

[@NeverToBeSeenAgain]

oh it might be compensation now that I think about it. I just remember hearing in passing it could do SOMETHING 6 stops down.

[@JackCamino]

wow

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you.

[@robinj.9329]

Pentax did make excellent cameras. I and my friends all used them for decades! One of my States most EXSPENSIVE Wedding photographers used Pextax for all of his 35mm work for near 40 years! And retired quite well to do. His Studio photos were on the Pentax 6x7cm slr. Bulky, but always used indoors on a tripod. It's sad that; just as Film reached the peek of It's technical development it was drowned by two rather dubious innovations. Auto-focus and digital image capture. As for myself, I still prefer film. Digital doesn't quite measure up. And I don't want to spend the many thousands of dollars it takes to actually get really sharp images. Plus my Digital prints all fad so fast! Their just awful!!!

[@DavidHancock]

Definitely yes. I love using Pentax cameras, highly reliable and very high-quality lenses.

[@RudeRichDallas]

Oh... please! WTF.... can you pontificate anymore!!!

[@DavidHancock]

+Richard Raymond Probably yes. I'll do another video for you.

[@WatchmakerErik]

If you don't want pontification, why are you watching reviews on youtube?

[@mikeemerson9832]

The MX is unreliable with weak gearing in the film advance. The sprockets were made out of poor quality steel and wear rapidly. Also the pawls on the sprockets break. The auto winder has problems with the battery cover locking wheel bracket snapping off. Pentax spares are almost impossible to find. Give this camera a miss and go for a Nikon FM2 which is fantastically reliable and parts are easy to find.

[@DavidHancock]

I've asked a number of camera repairmen I know about this. None of them agree with this comment's sentiment.

[@oct579]

Pentax LX was stronger personally i ad one still work haver 30 years

[@DavidHancock]

Afrowhite Afrowhite That's a camera I really want to make a video about. They have an amazing reputation.

[@epicon6]

"Brief review" but this video has no structure and it feels so slow and painful

[@DavidHancock]

Feel free to link to your structured, fast, and pain-free brief review. I'll pin the video you made as the top comment so that everyone who comes here can see what a real brief, structured, and pain-free review looks like.