Re: Sinking flagships

[Otis C. Wright, Jr.]

All though the spare camera may well make repair feasible which surely 
is a cost factor in itself, direct cost savings may not be so great.  My 
experience is that labor/overhead are by far the major cost contributors 
to most repairs.  Often the cost to recover a part from an assembly 
exceeds the cost of the new spare.

Otis.  

Taz wrote:

This is where a little planning and looking ahead might be profitable.  From
time to time you see used older cameras sold for parts or "as is" because
the seller doesn't know about cameras or because it's part of an estate sale
etc.  At any rate any camera on ebay that is not given the sellers bill of
health goes for cheap.  Walking into your local repair place or even by mail
with the parts camera on hand may well save you big dollars I would think.
 

I believe that camera manufacturers try to keep a 10-year supply of spare
parts for cameras after they have been discontinued.  If that is the case,
Pentax should have parts (I hope) for the LX until 2007 or so...  That
   

means
 

that I will probably have my LX CLA'd again around 2006.

However, I suspect that some independent repair facilities may be able to
CLA/repair LXs for some time after 2007, since the keep broken cameras for
parts.