> > From: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2006/10/11 Wed PM 12:34:00 GMT > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > Subject: Re: The JCO survey > > mike wilson wrote: > >> From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Date: 2006/10/11 Wed AM 05:22:15 GMT > >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net> > >> Subject: Re: The JCO survey > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "J. C. O'Connell" > >> Subject: RE: The JCO survey > >> > >> > >>> False, mechanical can be more reliable > >>> Than electronic in some sitations. It all depends on > >>> Good engineering. Bad engineering is what causes > >>> Problems, not necessarily whether its > >>> Mechanical or electronic. > >> Can be more reliable is not the same thing as is more reliable. > >> I own three Pentax LX camera bodies. > >> This is the best camera they made, apparently > >> > >> All three have needed service because of flakey metering components. > >> Either the ISO resistor or the aperture simulator resistor has been > >> faulty on all three of my cameras. > >> On one of them, this has been a multiple repair issue. > >> Can be more reliable? > >> > > <whisper> > > Those are electronic components... > > </whisper> > > > > Actually, they're electromechanical components. And the problems with > them are typically mechanical. >
Fun spoiler. ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
