People always underestimate the strength of polycarbonate plastics. Aside from no being susceptible to corrosion, some of these plastics are well-known to be bulletproof. (They coat the windows of windows of cars for political types with Lexan.) Metal, of course, will dent or deform. The polycarbonates won't do this. The only problem is that if the stress is sufficient, they will crack, and then the camera is toast. I'm convinced, however, that most of these impacts would also deform metal to a point that would cause equivalent damage. Metal is much better for precision pieces since it doesn't deform as much under lighter stresses (lens mounts) but as a body material or even as parts of a lens barrel they should be just as good.
Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/21/02 01:31AM >>> Hi, Perhaps a few of you may remember some of my stories regarding the durability of the my ZX-M camera. For those who may not, a quick summation: It's been rained on, snowed on, splashed, drenched, dropped in the mud, dropped in gravel, dropped on a cement driveway, kicked (some of this by an over-eager 4 year old aspiring photographer) dragged over boulders, dropped in a creek, been frozen, been baked, I've fallen on top of it and it's been thrown into a wall by same 4 year old throwing a tantrum (it was my designated "beater" camera). Having thus failed to destroy it, a little over a year ago, I gave it to another daughter, who was nine at the time. It's suffered the expected bumps and bruises one might expect a camera handled by a pre-teen to be subjected to, but tonight's episode took the cake. My daughter climbed up to the roof of our house to take a few pictures of the sun setting over the Great Salt Lake. She set the camera down, and it rolled off the roof to the cement patio below. Result? (I probably won't let the kids on the roof anymore) The camera? Still functioning just fine. I'm not trying to start a "which is better, new vs. old" thread here, heck, most of my cameras are of the old "chrome and leather" variety and I like them very much, thank you (a Super Program replaced the ZX-M as my designated "abuse" camera). I'd just like to say that yes, the ZX-M may look cheap, feel cheap, and maybe even is cheap ($150 bucks or so, USD) but in my experience, it is one tough little beastie. And no, I'm not planning on trying any of the above experiments with my ZX-5n. :-) William in Utah. - 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 . - 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 .
