On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Tom Rittenhouse wrote: > It amazes me how people who buy a worn out 20 plus year old camera are > sure those cameras were junk to start with.
Well, 20 years ago I was almost ready for nursery school, so I can't speak to that. :) All I can really say is that I've seen a lot of K-series bodies that have had incredible amounts of film through them, and they tend to hold up much better than the MX's that I've seen. Note that I'm only speaking of the cross-section of bodies that I've seen. > I have not been able to find a good low mileage MX in my area. I would think > two or three times about buying one sight unseen at any price. Agreed. It seems like the MX has more problems than other bodies in this respect, though. Apart from sticky mirror, the LX is a relatively problem-free camera by comparison, and the K-series bodies seem to go forever if they're properly taken care of. I'm assuming that not every MX pro user is an idiot, so surely *some* of them must have CLA'd and babied their MX's... and I still haven't seen one that's held up to extended use as long as an LX, most K-series bodies, and even many Spotmatics. This is a rough generalization, of course, and is just based on the cameras I've seen come through Don's in the past few years. chris - 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 .
