I'd say all 3 of the class of '80 Pro SLR's were superb. New F1's still sell for prices similar to an LX and F3's are only cheap because they're so common, having sold in numbers far exceeding the LX and New F1 (New F1's are probably the rarest of the three, I've seen a total of two in my life).
I actually prefer the F2 myself over the F3, after using them side by side for a couple months the F3 went back in the bag and sat (The F3 is a superb camera crippled by an atrocious display, F2's got your choice of standard needle or LED readouts, with external readouts as well, I also prefer non-HP finders, which my F2 has and F3 didn't). Note I sold my LX to use my F3, the F3 handled better for most shooting, while the LX came out ahead in meter readout and exposure compensation only. And some F2 versions hold their value even more than an LX (F2AS's, especially in black, as well as F2's with a matched eyelevel prism, particularly in black. F2 Eyelevel prisms often sell for more than other pro bodies all alone). -Adam Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > LOL > > The LX had more features and was arguably prettier to look at, but I > could use a Nikon F2 as a hammer and re-shingle a roof with it, and > it would still be in perfect alignment and take exceptional > photographs for another lifetime. Some of us valued that far more > than whether it was considered a mechanical jewel. It was a tank and > a shockingly well made camera of exceptional capability. And the > Nikon F3, my favorite, was no slouch either... ;-) > > G > > On Aug 27, 2007, at 4:08 PM, Bob Blakely wrote: > >> The LX. >> No other contender, and not by ANY brand. > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
