Minolta SRT vs Pentax Spotmatic?
Adam Jacobs
to take everywhere.. Internal lightmeter is must. Can anyone offer a
suggestion as to which of these cameras to buy? At first glance, the SRT
looks like a better camera.. Full aperture metering, and the metering
method is actually an average of 2 cells.. The spotmatic uses stop-down
metering with a single cell. Now, this is just the metering method, of
course.. Otherwise, the 2 cameras look pretty identical for features.
Any personal experiences? I have to admit, the SRT looks tougher.. but
the Spotmatic looks nicer. The Spotmatic sells for about twice what a
comparable quality SRT goes for.. Is it just because "Pentax" is a
better brand than "Minolta"? I'm currently shooting color with a
consumer-end Olympus IS-50, and doing portraits of the kids with my
Yashica-MAT. The Olympus is way too slow (f/4.9 at it's fastest, slowing
throughout the zoom) for a lot of edge of day photography.. Unless I'm
shooting super fast film. (800 or higher). Both the Takumar and Rokkor
lenses seem to be very very fast (f/1.7). Is one inherently better than
the other? I've read glowing reviews of both lenses.
I understand that the Spotmatic will work with modern Silver-oxide cells
without any modifications, where the SRT needs to have a diode
installed. (Not a big deal). So batteries aren't really a consideration.
Thanks,
-Adam
Colyn
wrote:
>I'm looking at buying an SLR for black&white work that's sturdy and easy
>to take everywhere.. Internal lightmeter is must. Can anyone offer a
>suggestion as to which of these cameras to buy? At first glance, the SRT
>looks like a better camera.. Full aperture metering, and the metering
>method is actually an average of 2 cells.. The spotmatic uses stop-down
>metering with a single cell. Now, this is just the metering method, of
>course.. Otherwise, the 2 cameras look pretty identical for features.
>Any personal experiences? I have to admit, the SRT looks tougher.. but
>the Spotmatic looks nicer. The Spotmatic sells for about twice what a
>comparable quality SRT goes for.. Is it just because "Pentax" is a
>better brand than "Minolta"? I'm currently shooting color with a
>consumer-end Olympus IS-50, and doing portraits of the kids with my
>Yashica-MAT. The Olympus is way too slow (f/4.9 at it's fastest, slowing
>throughout the zoom) for a lot of edge of day photography.. Unless I'm
>shooting super fast film. (800 or higher). Both the Takumar and Rokkor
>lenses seem to be very very fast (f/1.7). Is one inherently better than
>the other? I've read glowing reviews of both lenses.
>
The SRT's only weakness is the metering cell glass blocks are glued to
the main prism with a glue that is probably deteriated thus affecting
meter accuracy. However this is an easy fix with crystal clear glue
from micro-tools.com.
The Spotmatic's weakness is in the mirror return spring which is
somewhat weak due to age and will in all probability break with
moderate use. In order to fix this problem you have to remove the
mirror cage and if you are lucky to find another spring replace it.
Both cameras are very good cameras but my personal favorite is the
SRT. I still own and use several. The SRT is a lot tougher than the
Spotmatic..
As for the diode installation, it takes less than 5 minutes to
install..
Go with the SRT...
--
Colyn Goodson
Randall Ainsworth
Jacobs <jac...@hifo.net> wrote:
I've never cared for anything with the Minolta name on it. Their stuff
was always designed strangely and there were significant repair
problems.
My 1969 Spotmatic is still going strong.
bmoag
In any event I have Minoltas of that vintage that are in perfect shape.
Minolta, now departing this world, was one of the best 35mm SLR and lens
manufacturers ever.
Colyn
<r...@nospam.techline.com> wrote:
>I've never cared for anything with the Minolta name on it. Their stuff
>was always designed strangely and there were significant repair
>problems.
>
>
Could you be more specific??
What exactly were the significant repair problems?
Randall Ainsworth
<jcg13@sw_REMOVTHIS_bell.net> wrote:
> Could you be more specific??
>
> What exactly were the significant repair problems?
Back when we had a local camera shop, they used to get a lot of
Minoltas of all models in for repair - more than any other brand.
UC
Indestructible.
Colyn
<r...@nospam.techline.com> wrote:
>> Could you be more specific??
>>
>> What exactly were the significant repair problems?
>
>Back when we had a local camera shop, they used to get a lot of
>Minoltas of all models in for repair - more than any other brand.
>
You didn't answer my question which is what were the specific
problems?
I've owned and used Minoltas since the SR-series first came out and
have never seen any significant problems.
As I stated before the only weakness of the SRT was with the meter
cell glass glue would deteriated with age and had to be cleaned and
re-glued which is a fairly simple repair.
I've seen no significant problems with the XD or XE series and the
XG-9 I bought new is still working as good as the day I bought it.
Colyn
wrote:
>Leicaflex SL and two-cam lenses. They are plentiful and cheap.
>Indestructible.
>
Unless you get lucky you won't get a Leicaflex cheap but the 2 cam
lens can be had for not much more than say a Minolta or Nikon lens of
the same focal length.
UC
Colyn wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2006 06:20:54 -0800, "UC" <uraniumc...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Leicaflex SL and two-cam lenses. They are plentiful and cheap.
> >Indestructible.
> >
> Unless you get lucky you won't get a Leicaflex cheap but the 2 cam
> lens can be had for not much more than say a Minolta or Nikon lens of
> the same focal length.
...and the Leiz lens generally being of far superior quality.
See:
http://www.keh.com/shop/product.cfm?bid=LR&cid=02&sid=newused&crid=13385706
Colyn
wrote:
>...and the Leiz lens generally being of far superior quality.
>
>See:
>
I got my first Leica in 1959 when my granddad gave me a IIIa with
Summar.
I now have several screwmount Leicas, 2 M3's, and a M4 along with a
number of Leica lens. I sold my SL a few years ago.
I found a IIIfBD at the local flea market with 50mm f/2 Summicron for
$20. I just replaced the curtains and am in the process of timing the
shutter with my homemade shutter speed timer.
I agree that Leicas are the best. I also believe Minoltas are the best
as far as Japanese cameras go.
Mojtaba
wrote:
>Leicaflex SL and two-cam lenses. They are plentiful and cheap.
Cheap????
You are cheap. hehhehhehheh
UC
Mojtaba wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2006 06:20:54 -0800, "UC" <uraniumc...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Leicaflex SL and two-cam lenses. They are plentiful and cheap.
>
> Cheap????
Yes, cheap for what you get. Look on KEH at all the lenses and how
reasonable they are.
http://www.keh.com/shop/product.cfm?bid=LR&cid=06&sid=newused&crid=13399790
http://www.keh.com/shop/product.cfm?bid=LR&cid=02&sid=newused&crid=13399790
Consider that these lenses will outlast anything else by a considerable
margin, and perform at the highest levels optically, it's a no-brainer.
>
> You are cheap. hehhehhehheh
Adam Jacobs
Well, specifically, such ancient gear because the quality / price ratio
is so good. I spent $100 on that Olympus (retail $300), and I described
its problems. Digital is even more money for decent quality. These 70's
SLR's are very sweet quality for very little money ($30-$50).
Besides, I love the solid feel of a real metal SLR.
Well, I think I'm going to go with the SRT, then. Thanks everyone!
UC
Choke, cough...
Adam Jacobs
a winner to me.
Thanks.
Adam Jacobs
I think I should have been more specific.. A quick check of ebay is showing:
Minolta SRT at $30
Pentax Spotmatic at $60
Leicaflex at $300
I'm in the SRT-Spotmatic pricerange for this camera. I do believe whole
heartedly that more money buys a better camera (Leica, Nikon, etc).. I'm
just not in that market at all. This camera will be replacing a Petri FT
1000, and will sit in the same camera bag as an Olympus IS-50 and a
YashicaMat.
UC
People are buying $3000 cameras like water, and you think $300 is a lot
of money?
Colyn
wrote:
>Thank you for your very well thought out and detailed reply. Sounds like
>a winner to me.
>
>Thanks.
>
You can't go wrong with the SRT..
Colyn
wrote:
>Holy cow!
>I think I should have been more specific.. A quick check of ebay is showing:
>Minolta SRT at $30
>Pentax Spotmatic at $60
>Leicaflex at $300
>
The problem with the Leicaflex is most who buy just sit it on a shelf
and look at it.
I've been told I'm an idiot for using my Leica gear but a camera is
made to take photos not sit on a shelf.
>
>I'm in the SRT-Spotmatic pricerange for this camera. I do believe whole
>heartedly that more money buys a better camera (Leica, Nikon, etc).. I'm
>just not in that market at all. This camera will be replacing a Petri FT
>1000, and will sit in the same camera bag as an Olympus IS-50 and a
>YashicaMat.
>
I once had a Petri FT. A good camera in its day.
UC
Colyn wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 15:54:07 -0600, Adam Jacobs <jac...@hifo.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Holy cow!
> >I think I should have been more specific.. A quick check of ebay is showing:
> >Minolta SRT at $30
> >Pentax Spotmatic at $60
> >Leicaflex at $300
> >
> The problem with the Leicaflex is most who buy just sit it on a shelf
> and look at it.
> I've been told I'm an idiot for using my Leica gear but a camera is
> made to take photos not sit on a shelf.
I use mine---a lot!
It must really piss people off at Leica to see their products just
sitting around, when they take such great pains in ergonomic design.
Adam Jacobs
party because you know the Communist Party don't stop.
I've only been shooting for about 2 years now, and I just don't buy into
the idea that more money will get me better pictures at this point in my
hobby.
(shrug)
dj_nme
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 15:54:07 -0600, Adam Jacobs <jac...@hifo.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>Holy cow!
>>I think I should have been more specific.. A quick check of ebay is showing:
>>Minolta SRT at $30
>>Pentax Spotmatic at $60
>>Leicaflex at $300
>
> The problem with the Leicaflex is most who buy just sit it on a shelf
> and look at it.
> I've been told I'm an idiot for using my Leica gear but a camera is
> made to take photos not sit on a shelf.
I also thought that was strange myself, that some-one would buy a camera
and not take pictures.
Why didn't they buy a sculpture, engraving or painting instead and leave
the useful stuff to people who will use it rather than shelve it?
>>I'm in the SRT-Spotmatic pricerange for this camera. I do believe whole
>>heartedly that more money buys a better camera (Leica, Nikon, etc).. I'm
>>just not in that market at all. This camera will be replacing a Petri FT
>>1000, and will sit in the same camera bag as an Olympus IS-50 and a
>>YashicaMat.
>
> I once had a Petri FT. A good camera in its day.
Has the shutter or wind-on mechanism died, to stop it from still being a
good camera?
Adam Jacobs
meter.. But it's nice to be able to just get the shot without packing
along extra gear. Also, I would like a camera that I can buy lenses for.
Other than that, the camera still works fine. Know anyone that wants it?
Free to good home.
Colyn
>> The problem with the Leicaflex is most who buy just sit it on a shelf
>> and look at it.
>> I've been told I'm an idiot for using my Leica gear but a camera is
>> made to take photos not sit on a shelf.
>
>I also thought that was strange myself, that some-one would buy a camera
>and not take pictures.
>Why didn't they buy a sculpture, engraving or painting instead and leave
>the useful stuff to people who will use it rather than shelve it?
>
Some people collect to look at not use.
>
>> I once had a Petri FT. A good camera in its day.
>
>Has the shutter or wind-on mechanism died, to stop it from still being a
>good camera?
>
The camera died.. I ended up selling it for parts.
UC
Colyn wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 18:33:17 +1100, dj_nme <dj_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >> The problem with the Leicaflex is most who buy just sit it on a shelf
> >> and look at it.
> >> I've been told I'm an idiot for using my Leica gear but a camera is
> >> made to take photos not sit on a shelf.
> >
> >I also thought that was strange myself, that some-one would buy a camera
> >and not take pictures.
> >Why didn't they buy a sculpture, engraving or painting instead and leave
> >the useful stuff to people who will use it rather than shelve it?
> >
> Some people collect to look at not use.
> >
> >> I once had a Petri FT. A good camera in its day.
No, it wasn't. It was crap.
Colyn
>> >> I once had a Petri FT. A good camera in its day.
>
>No, it wasn't. It was crap.
>
It was a bit awkward to use but the slides I have taken with this
camera are every bit as good as those taken with other cameras.
I bought it from a friend while stationed in Vietnam so it saw hard
use. Finally died about 3 years ago..
UC
Colyn
>Petri was one of the worst Japanese camera companies, ever.
>
Is this based on personal experience or what someone else said??
Petri never tried to compete with the big names. They were however
making good consumer grade cameras very capable of making just as good
photos as the big boys..
The Petri Penta VI with its bayonet lens was one of the best early
60's SLR's and the lens were on a par with other top end SLR's and the
Petri Color 35 was a top end leaf shutter scale focus camera.
dj_nme
I must admit that I was impressed by the strength of the Petri SLR
lensmount design when I first saw one.
Kind of like a shrunk down version of the Kiev 60 and Pentacon Six
lensmount.
Randall Ainsworth
<uraniumc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Petri was one of the worst Japanese camera companies, ever.
A lot of servicemen bought them, only to have them go tits up when they
got back to the States.
UC
Yup....I saw a few of 'em over the years, almost always not working..