Canon or Pentax?

[tudor96stani]

Now I've seen that this question has been highly debated over the internet, but here it is: what would you suggest to buy: Canon AE-1 or Pentax K1000? A seller on Amazon has the both, refurbished for $140, both including 50mm lenses.
I'm not a photography expert, and from what I saw, the Canon looks far more complicated. Separate button to view the depth of field through the viewfinder and all the information that is displayed on the viewfinder - it looks like it's too much. And I don't like the fact that it depends on a battery completely, especially since that type of battery is not accessible at the nearest supermarket or something. On the other hand, I like the fact it has some automatic features - most of the time I'd like to manually set them, but there are times when auto might come in handy.

The Pentax seems to be much more straightforward, easier to use, and the battery is not "compulsory". I also like the fact that it is fully mechanical so there are fewer things to go wrong (or so I read!).
Anyway, what's your take on this competition between the two of them?

 

[webestang6440 2]

I still use my Pentax K1000 I got in 1980.....rugged tank of a camera. The AE-1 is a good camera but the K1000 is a great starter camera.

 

[tudor96stani]

I've heard it is good. But there's also a seller who offers along with the Canon, a 50mm and a 28mm, at a pretty good price. Is the 28mm worth it? Also, is it "safe" to change the lenses on these cameras while the film is still inside?

 

[webestang6440 2]

I've heard it is good. But there's also a seller who offers along with the Canon, a 50mm and a 28mm, at a pretty good price. Is the 28mm worth it?

Only if the 28mm is a Canon lens, not a "off" brand. But, I bought a really clean Pentax 28mm for $25 a year ago.

 

[tudor96stani]

Yep, both lenses are Canon. But since it would cost too much to buy from Amazon (shipping is way to expensive), I'd rather buy locally. The cheapest 50mm for the pentax I found is $50, while the Canon with 2 lenses is $110.

 

[SoulfulRecover]

yeah you can change the lens while the film is loaded.

 

[Mike_E]

AE-1s are way overpriced these days.

The pentax Ks are as well though not quite so bad.

Do yourself a favor and get a Nikon N90s. You'll spend more on lenses but they'll Work on most digital Nikons whereas the old Canon lenses wont. This means that if you tire of this whole thing you can get your money back because the Nikon lenses will still be in demand.

Yes, the N90s (this is the model number/ as opposed to an N90) work on batteries but they are AAs and are available practically anywhere. They also last a long time.


Or, if you're determined to get one that will work without batteries try here http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Manual-Focus-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-NK020102005900?r=FE

 

[limr9 7]

Another vote for the K1000. I've shot mine for more than 20 years and still use it regularly. Pentax lenses can be had easily - they're less expensive generally and very good lenses. And the bodies are tanks, really. Mine tumbled about 4-5 feet off a stone wall onto concrete. I have a small crack on the top plate but it made absolutely no difference in the operation of the camera.

 

[Derrel]

The last 35mm film camera I bought was an N90s....back when used ones were still $300-$325...so I guess it was about the year 2001 or 2002 that I bought it. The thing about the N90s, and you WANT the "s" in my opinion--it has autofocusing, but it';s sort of a hybrid between the old, before the flood feeling of the Pentax K1000, and it's much more refined and has a bigger, better viewfinder image than most 35mm SLRs made in the Canon AE-1 era.

No offense to the AE-1 or the K1000; I used one in high school ever week, the AE-1, and the K-1000 I tried a few times in school, but it was so primitive that I bought a MUCH better 35mm, a Nikon FM instead, and even picked up a Pentax MX kit for a while before flipping it. But, seriously...the AE-1 is just...so...clunky and mid-1970's...the N90s is like two decades more-refined....the K 100 was always an economy model, with no on-off switch for the light meter, so if the lens cap is left off, the battery is CONSTANTLY draining, anytime light is being read by the meter....my God...a set of meter batteries today at most regular stores ends up being $8.99 for the two A-76 cells, unless you "source them" and buy cheap-o batts.

Two things: An AE-1 for $140 is *ridiculously overpriced*. YESTERDAY I saw a Minolta XD-11 with 50/1.4, 28/2.8, and a 35-70 + a nice flash and a bag for $75 at Desseret Industries. ALL-Minolta gear and a small REI camera bag. Second: a "refurbished" AE-1???? Whaaaaat do you think that means? I think it means, "Cleaned up with some Q-Tips, and a microfiber cloth or a tee-shirt and some alcohol, and blasted with canned air." THAT is what I expect "refurbished" means.

Neither an AE-1 nor a K 1000 would be my choices. Buy a Nikon N90s...a camera that uses lenses that are not from a DEAD mount, like Canon FD, or Minolta....no new cameras using those mounts have been made in decades. Canon killed the FD mount off in 1987 when they went all-EF mount with the new EOS. Minolta is out of business, and their lenses and cameras are dead-ended as well.

Pentax's K-mount and Nikon's F-mount live on. But really....an N90s or a REAL "professional-caliber" camera like say a Nikon F100, is VERY affordable. The Canon AE-1 is a hipster relic with 1970's engineering and a dead lens mount. Look at the prices on Nikon F100 cameras, or even Canon EOS-1 bodies...BOTH are luxury bodies, available CHEAP.

 

[Derrel]

I just looked at KEH.com...

http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-EOS-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-CE029990075940?r=FE

A Canon EOS 1N with booster for $159 in Excellent shape??? This was a $2,000, FLAGSHIP, top of the brand model camera at one time...not a $109 camera 30 years ago, nor a $159.95 camera 35 years ago, which is what a K 1000 and an AE-1 were...

An F100 in EX+ is $250, a Bargain one is much less. http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Autofocus-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-NA029990339960?r=F
One of the finest Nikon bodies ever made for a film shooter.

The N90s...you can buy one for $37.

When you see the words "surface sticky", it refers to the body coating. Cameras of that era went from a decades-long type of body covering to a more modern rubbery and "grippy" type material which after about 15-20 years, starts deteriorating, and gets a sticky residue on the outer surfaces of the body covering.

I love cameras...but the AE-1 is like a dented-up 1968 VW beetle...the K 1000 is a 1985 Chevy Caprice...a Nikon N90s is like a used 2002 BMW...a Canon EOS 1N is like a 2006 E-class Benz...a Nikon F100 is a 2006 E-CLASS BENZ, PAINTED BLACK.

 

[cgw155 180]

The last 35mm film camera I bought was an N90s....back when used ones were still $300-$325...so I guess it was about the year 2001 or 2002 that I bought it. The thing about the N90s, and you WANT the "s" in my opinion--it has autofocusing, but it';s sort of a hybrid between the old, before the flood feeling of the Pentax K1000, and it's much more refined and has a bigger, better viewfinder image than most 35mm SLRs made in the Canon AE-1 era.

No offense to the AE-1 or the K1000; I used one in high school ever week, the AE-1, and the K-1000 I tried a few times in school, but it was so primitive that I bought a MUCH better 35mm, a Nikon FM instead, and even picked up a Pentax MX kit for a while before flipping it. But, seriously...the AE-1 is just...so...clunky and mid-1970's...the N90s is like two decades more-refined....the K 100 was always an economy model, with no on-off switch for the light meter, so if the lens cap is left off, the battery is CONSTANTLY draining, anytime light is being read by the meter....my God...a set of meter batteries today at most regular stores ends up being $8.99 for the two A-76 cells, unless you "source them" and buy cheap-o batts.

Two things: An AE-1 for $140 is *ridiculously overpriced*. YESTERDAY I saw a Minolta XD-11 with 50/1.4, 28/2.8, and a 35-70 + a nice flash and a bag for $75 at Desseret Industries. ALL-Minolta gear and a small REI camera bag. Second: a "refurbished" AE-1???? Whaaaaat do you think that means? I think it means, "Cleaned up with some Q-Tips, and a microfiber cloth or a tee-shirt and some alcohol, and blasted with canned air." THAT is what I expect "refurbished" means.

Neither an AE-1 nor a K 1000 would be my choices. Buy a Nikon N90s...a camera that uses lenses that are not from a DEAD mount, like Canon FD, or Minolta....no new cameras using those mounts have been made in decades. Canon killed the FD mount off in 1987 when they went all-EF mount with the new EOS. Minolta is out of business, and their lenses and cameras are dead-ended as well.

Pentax's K-mount and Nikon's F-mount live on. But really....an N90s or a REAL "professional-caliber" camera like say a Nikon F100, is VERY affordable. The Canon AE-1 is a hipster relic with 1970's engineering and a dead lens mount. Look at the prices on Nikon F100 cameras, or even Canon EOS-1 bodies...BOTH are luxury bodies, available CHEAP.

Agree totally. Unless you're intent making a retro fashion statement, cameras that old arguably aren't worth it when superb late model AF Nikons are thick on the ground. The N90s/F90x is killer: well-made, great VF. AA-powered, focus assist with AF+MF lenses, TTL flash metering with affordable Nikon film speedlights, good ergonomics. Have two with MB-10 battery grips and love 'em. The F100 is a bit more but delivers more features. Giveaway-priced now is the Nikon 8008s/801s--almost as good as the N90s. Point is, there's no reason now to pass on these far newer, more flexible cameras at current prices.

 

[webestang6440 2]

I just looked at KEH.com...

http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-EOS-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-CE029990075940?r=FE

A Canon EOS 1N with booster for $159 in Excellent shape??? This was a $2,000, FLAGSHIP, top of the brand model camera at one time...not a $109 camera 30 years ago, nor a $159.95 camera 35 years ago, which is what a K 1000 and an AE-1 were...

An F100 in EX+ is $250, a Bargain one is much less. http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Autofocus-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-NA029990339960?r=F
One of the finest Nikon bodies ever made for a film shooter.

The N90s...you can buy one for $37.

When you see the words "surface sticky", it refers to the body coating. Cameras of that era went from a decades-long type of body covering to a more modern rubbery and "grippy" type material which after about 15-20 years, starts deteriorating, and gets a sticky residue on the outer surfaces of the body covering.

I love cameras...but the AE-1 is like a dented-up 1968 VW beetle...the K 1000 is a 1985 Chevy Caprice...a Nikon N90s is like a used 2002 BMW...a Canon EOS 1N is like a 2006 E-class Benz...a Nikon F100 is a 2006 E-CLASS BENZ, PAINTED BLACK.

My Canon A2-E was $850 for the body back in 1996.........when KEH came to our shop for a "buy back" camera they said they would give me $50 for it........glad I wasn't serious about doing that........!

I agree with Nikon's......tons of them out there cheap.

 

[Derrel]

Agree totally. Unless you're intent making a retro fashion statement, cameras that old arguably aren't worth it when superb late model AF Nikons are thick on the ground. The N90s/F90x is killer: well-made, great VF. AA-powered, focus assist with AF+MF lenses, TTL flash metering with affordable Nikon film speedlights, good ergonomics. Have two with MB-10 battery grips and love 'em. The F100 is a bit more but delivers more features. Giveaway-priced now is the Nikon 8008s/801s--almost as good as the N90s. Point is, there's no reason now to pass on these far newer, more flexible cameras at current prices.

All three of those cameras have fantastic viewfinder Image quality. BIG! BRIGHT! CLEAR! Easy to compose. The 8008s/801s was always a wonderful camera. The N90s was its replacement. The F100 was the "D700" to the "D3s" back in the F5 era. A few years ago, Portland Police Department turned in a set of six F100's priced initially for sale at $185 each...they did NOT sell...the price had to be reduced to $120 each to finally,after months of sitting there, to get them out of the used case, one by one by one, over months. It's almost inconceivable that bodies like the F100 are now as cgw calls it, "thick on the ground," like fallen oak leaves...the price collapse on the things has just been shocking. Same with the EOS 1 and EOS1n...I mean...MAN...the dealers can barely give these things away...most buyers want digital cameras.

The issue of batteries is one I brought up because the N90s is remarkably power-efficient with its standard AA grip...and AA's are affordable and plentiful. If a guy wants a "retro fashion statement camera", the Nikon FE or FM, or FM-2 or FM2-n are also practically give-away models these days, and are significantly better than some of the other companies' older models. Some of the "oldies" had 1/60 flash synch, which is kinda limited compared to say, TTL flash metering at 1/250 second. My impression on the AE-1 is that it was cheaply made...plastic top and bottom plates, cheap parts, roughh feel,plastic-on-plastic gearing, average finish, and basically an economy camera designed to be "good enough" and make a high profit for Canon. An 'electronic camera', for a new era. K1000 had a mechanically-timed shutter, very old-school, and basic quality issues were adequately addressed. The FM was better made than either; the Pentax MX was better made; the Nikon 8008s, then N90 and N90s were another class "higher-up" and sold for around $589 new back when that was two months' rent...and over the long term, Nikon's "semi-professional" bodies continued to get better and better. I just cannot see paying as muchm, or more, for a 1974 camera with primitive feature set when for $100 LESS you can buy a N90s body...

 

[compur]

Now I've seen that this question has been highly debated over the internet, but here it is: what would you suggest to buy: Canon AE-1 or Pentax K1000? A seller on Amazon has the both, refurbished for $140, both including 50mm lenses.
I'm not a photography expert, and from what I saw, the Canon looks far more complicated. Separate button to view the depth of field through the viewfinder and all the information that is displayed on the viewfinder - it looks like it's too much. And I don't like the fact that it depends on a battery completely, especially since that type of battery is not accessible at the nearest supermarket or something. On the other hand, I like the fact it has some automatic features - most of the time I'd like to manually set them, but there are times when auto might come in handy.

The Pentax seems to be much more straightforward, easier to use, and the battery is not "compulsory". I also like the fact that it is fully mechanical so there are fewer things to go wrong (or so I read!).
Anyway, what's your take on this competition between the two of them?

You're right. The AE-1 is more complicated and it is battery-dependent while the K-1000 is a simple mechanical SLR that only uses a battery for the meter.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of the AE-1 or AE-1 Program. Though they can be shot in manual mode, they were really designed to be primarily used in auto modes and many newbies get confused with these cameras when trying to use them in manual mode (and their instruction books aren't much help in this department). These cameras also have a complex electromechanical system for releasing the shutter which is prone to failure as the camera ages (and they're getting pretty old now). But, on the plus side, the Canon FD lenses that these cameras use are excellent.

There aren't many purely mechanical cameras with an auto exposure mode that I would recommend. There are some that use a battery-free selenium meter and do have an auto mode but those old selenium meters are not very accurate. These cameras are mostly either rangefinder cameras or finicky German SLRs.

A manual focusing, robust and reliable SLR that can operate in either manual or auto mode that I would recommend is the Nikon FE or FE2. These cameras are battery dependent but the batteries are cheap, easy to find and easy to replace. These cameras also do have one battery-free shutter speed which you can use in a pinch. They are not auto-focusing though (I gather you prefer a manual focus camera anyway).

 

[vintagesnaps]

Refurbished?? Cameras that old? Cleaned & adjusted, sure, but seems like anybody can list anything on Amazon, I'd be curious about the listing.

You probably made a good point that the Canon has more features and could be somewhat more complicated; the Pentax was always a good student or learner camera, but either should be good, just depends on which you think will be best for you. I like to use vintage mechanical film cameras myself.

I think Buy & Sell New & Used Cameras ? Canon, Nikon, Hasselblad, Leica & More - KEH.com might ship internationally, I've done well buying used from them. If nothing else you could check their listings for 35mm and look up Pentax manual focus (which are the K mount) and Canon manual focus and get an idea of their pricing.