Mike Johnston wrote:
> I agree. I'm drinking coffee right now out
> of a mug that I bought at a Shaker Village
> in Kentucky when I was 9. I tend to get
> attached to things.
I have to laugh - I've got a mug that's about 20 years old
which I dearly love. It was hand made, and part of a matched
set of two that I got for my birthday. Of course, being hand
made, they are not identical. When I got the mugs I decided
which I preferred, and that's been my mug ever since. What is
interesting is that, over the years, it's taken on a patina
that's very satisfying. Slight rough edges have been worn
smooth, the color has changed a bit, and it has matured into
something even better than what it was when new.
> I really loathe the cheapening of America.
I would gladly pay more for items that are durable rather than
disposable. For example, when I got my first computer (1988)
I bought a Northgate keyboard. I think it cost about $150.00
or so. It was made with a metal base, was heavy, and had a
great feel to the keys. Just a few months ago I decided to
replace it as, after 13 years, it was showing some signs of
wear and I couldn't find anyone to repair it. I looked around
and finally found another Northgate keyboard - an original,
not a clone or knockoff - which was in better shape than
mine. I hope to keep it for another ten years or so, and if I
can find someone who can repair the sticky keys on the first
keyboard, I'll have it repaired. It has a few features the
later model doesn't have.
So, while I've had two keyboards in more than a dozen years,
some people have had a dozen in the same space of time.
Although I paid a lot of money for the Northgate, it's worked
out to be quite a bit cheaper in the long run, more friendly
to the environment, and - perhaps just as important - it's
given me pleasure to use.
> There's a church in England
> that has a slate roof that's 800 years old. The slate has holes in it and is
> hung on oak pegs. Every 400 years they have to replace the pegs.
That's the problem with old things - they're often high
maintenance <g>.
> Back on topic, cameras are fun to collect simply because older ones were
> made so nicely. Many of them are beautiful and can still be used today.
Well, my Leicas are more than 40 years old. They still work
perfectly, are serviceable, and are still serviced by Leica.
One of them, the M2, has never been serviced - it still has
the original "L" seal - and was recently checked and found to
be in perfect order. They are jewels. Some of my old
Pentaxes are like that, too.
BTW, it was some comments that were attributed to you about
shutter durability in one of your columns that prompted my
question about the durability of the MZ-S shutter.
> Personally I think Pentax's aim to make a camera that users will want to
> take to their graves is admirable.
But will they make such a camera? Will they stand behind it
with service and parts for forty years? Or will it, like most
other cameras, be unrepairable after a dozen years or so, when
parts are gone and service people no longer have the skills
needed to make repairs?
True story: I have a few older cars. One is a 1964 Cadillac,
and when I went to the local Cadillac dealer to buy some
tune-up parts I was told that they are unavailable through
Cadillac or General Motors. OTOH, I can get any part I want
for my old Mercedes, even obscure hoses, grommets, gaskets,
weather stripping, and the like. That sort of thing is also
part of what makes an item a quality item.
> Bring it on, Pentax.
Don't hold your breath ...
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"It matters little how much equipment we use; it
matters much that we be masters of all we do use." - Sam Abell
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
