Hi Margo, When I finally realized I needed to go to 35mm, after comparing similar shots from my friend's Olympus OM-1 and my 110 (Keystone I think) I began to do research. It's that engineering side of me.
This was in 1983. I was looking for something that would not only provide me automation, which was just coming available, and still useable in manual. When I handled the cameras, Nikon and Canon were too big. Leica was too costly. The Pentax Super Program was great! I still have that camera. I took it out about a month ago and shot a roll through it for fun. But I have been spoiled by the LX's viewfinder... The Super Program was followed by the first LX. Eventually it was a question of needing two different types of film and a camera as backup for my travels. I never complained of the Pentax glass so why change? I started with a 50mm and I believe my next lens was the A70-210 f4 then the A28-135 f4. From there I began with prime lenses. Now that I have had a chance to use Nikon glass, and view similar shots from friends' Canon cameras I have to consider myself lucky to have started with Pentax. I guess you can say I am entrenched with Pentax with about 18 camera bodies, both k and screwmount, and 27 lenses. Cesar Panama City, Florida -----Original Message----- From: Margo Ellen Gesser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2002 10:32 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Orgin Myths Hi Pentaxians, I am about to ask all of you a big question: Why ARE we using Pentax gear instead of other brands? My answer is simple: I started with a K1000 and when I was able to upgrade I wanted to keep my lenses so I bought the MZ-3. I also worked in a camera store that has now closed (sob) where all our new cameras were Pentax or Canon, so I became saturated with all things Pentax. Margo
