Hey Bruce ... No need for the Nomex underwear, you just have different needs and preferences.
Spot metering on the LX would be nice, but since I don't use a meter much these days, I don't really care too much one way or another. And since I don't use flash I couldn't care about flash sync ... in fact, none of the features you mentioned are ones that I have a need for. In the FWIW department, the low light shots I took last night were just fine with no signs of reciprocity failure. Others have mentioned this, too. Anyway, I'm just mentioning all this not to negate your comments but to emphasize the point that one camera may perform better, or be more comfortable to use, for one person than another. Blindly following "list enablement" is silly, although I'm not suggesting that Frantisek is doing that, as it seems he's looked into the features that are important to him. Having spent a few hours with a PZ-1p it became clear that it was not the camera for me, regardless of its modern features. The camera was uncomfortable to hold, had too many bells and whistles, lacked true MLU, interchangeable finders, the great tactile sensation of a black metal body, and a certain "stealth" quality. But that doesn't mean that it's a poor camera, or that it's not the ideal body for some people. As an addendum to my morning, coffee-inspired rambling, I received a 66 year old Leica the other day. Talk about "retro" - it doesn't even offer interchangeable lenses in the manner to which we've become accustomed, and the viewfinder is tiny, there's no film advance lever, just a knob, and film loading seems to require some contortionist skills. Nonetheless, it's a very appealing camera, and playing with it has shown that it has some advantages over more modern cameras, although ease of use may not be one of them. For example, my first reaction to there being no advance lever was that it would be a PITA to move the film along. But, after playing with it for a while I realized that I could turn the knob quite easily with just a finger, and that I didn't have to remove the camera from my eye to make way for the advance lever. IOW, advancing the film was very simple and easier for a left-eyed shooter like myself. With the collapsible lens the entire camera is only 42mm deep, and with a body that is both narrower and shorter than the MX, it fits easily into the pocket of most of my shirts, and into the pockets of my jeans, a feature that I like and which is somewhat important to me. So, while I don't see it as being a daily shooter, I do see its advantages and benefits, and recognize that it might have a place in ~my~ camera bag, while others will handily dismiss this little jewel in favor of the features provided by a bigger, louder, body with bigger lenses. Bruce Dayton wrote: > I know it is probably a sacrilege to say so...but I have not been > tempted by the LX. Even after handling one of Shel's. I don't feel > that for my uses and needs that it really offers an over abundance of > features. Unique to it are probably build quality and low-light > metering. What is missing are things like spot metering, high speed > flash synch, program & shutter priority, easy flash fill, AF and > simple things like you mentioned plague you - DX coding of film > cartridges. I freely admit that there are some system things about the > LX that aren't available to the MZ-S and PZ-1p, but those are things > that I don't need very often or have never used so I don't know what > I've been missing. In my hands, and for my uses, the LX is not the > ideal camera. I don't shoot much low light, and if I did, I suspect > that reciprocity failure creeps in pretty quick anyway - causing a > need for bracketing. My night time experiments have turned out just > fine without an LX. Yes, it might be a little better but not enough > to warrant all the other things that I lose that I use more. > > I suspect, you should really try one. If you are one of those who > becomes smitten with it, then by all means, get one. I think the > advice is wise to plan on a good CLA to make sure you know the state > of the camera. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - 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 .
