No. It was in a Norwegian Photo magazine back in 1980 when the LX was first shown. It
was clear that the LX was meant as a professional camera as the then Asahi boss talked
about how thoroughly the LX was tested and they couldn't afford to release a
professional body that hadn't all the fault ir
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: Vs: LX Questions
> Mark Roberts posted, among other things:
> > >> I read an interview with the then Asahi boss, Minoru Suzuki, who
&g
Aihe: Re: Vs: LX Questions
>The most common problem with MXs is the meter switch either not
>activating at all or coming on when you don't want it to (thus draining
>the battery). It's usually a very simple adjustment to fix it.
>The next most common problem I've seen is
Actually I have a more interesting problem. The meter on one of my MX's
actually
shuts off if it reads more than 1 stop overexposed. It happens if you
change f-stop
or shutter speed. I can't fathom what might be wrong. The other problem I
have is
probably corrosion on the flash switch contac
Mark Roberts posted, among other things:
> >> I read an interview with the then Asahi boss, Minoru Suzuki, who
explained in
> >> detail the philosophy behind the LX. It was meant as an answer to the
> >> Nikon F2 and Canon F1.
Is this on line and if so where? sounds
interesting.
Actually I have a more interesting problem. The meter on one of my MX's
actually
shuts off if it reads more than 1 stop overexposed. It happens if you
change f-stop
or shutter speed. I can't fathom what might be wrong. The other problem I
have is
probably corrosion on the flash switch contac
The most common problem with MXs is the meter switch either not
activating at all or coming on when you don't want it to (thus draining
the battery). It's usually a very simple adjustment to fix it.
The next most common problem I've seen is a mis-aligned shutter-speed
indicator dial in the viewfind
I think that's a hard comparison to make, most of my friends in college who
were into photography had used F's and they were falling apart even then,
probably from hard use but still.
At 02:31 PM 1/31/2003 -0800, you wrote:
But how durable is the MX?
Certainly no big F or F2.
regards,
Alan Cha
Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 30. tammikuuta 2003 12:56
Aihe: Re: LX Questions
>> The MX was marketed as
AIL PROTECTED]>
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 30. tammikuuta 2003 12:56
Aihe: Re: LX Questions
>> The MX was marketed as a pro system also, and so was the PZ-1.
>
>
>
>There is a significant difference: the LX was specified for over 100 000
Dan Scott wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 11:16 PM, Peter Alling wrote:
>
> > Forced?
> >
>
> 'e's well known as a horribly incorrigible bully. Just as likely to
> give you a wedgie up to your ears as the time o'day. I wouldn't mess
> with 'im.
>
> Dan Scott
Yeah I still have fingern
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LX Questions
>
> Oh. Sorry. By the way I sent my second post on this thread before reading
the
> above.
> However, it *is* a bit more on-topic than some of the other issues that
are
> fought about here
An incompetent CLA will kill it as well.
At 12:47 PM 1/30/2003 +0100, you wrote:
Paul wrote:
> My single LX has now exposed 1500 rolls of film without a hiccup. It was
> well used when I bought it three years ago, and Pentax Colorado serviced
> it at that time. Perhaps it's the luck of the draw?
The LX was a professional camera because it was part of an entire system
that would enable a photographer, with additional components, to take
just about any type of picture that was done with 35mm. So it includes
things like different backs, drives, finders, screens, etc. Pro cameras
are also
Paul wrote:
> My single LX has now exposed 1500 rolls of film without a hiccup. It was
> well used when I bought it three years ago, and Pentax Colorado serviced
> it at that time. Perhaps it's the luck of the draw?
> Paul Stenquist
Mine worked for 19 years before it developed its first fault. I
> The MX was marketed as a pro system also, and so was the PZ-1.
There is a significant difference: the LX was specified for over 100 000 shutter
cycles and throughly tested under severe conditions. I read an interview with the then
Asahi boss, Minoru Suzuki, who explained in detail the philos
> (Let's not get into the what's a professional or professional camera et.
> al. again, Please).
Yes, it's a red herring the size of an Orca.
--Mike
Mr Chan posted:
> A product that was designed and manufactured to be used heavily or
> professionally, doesn't mean it must be reliable.
I disagree. If it is designed to be used heavily then that includes performing
reliably under that kind of use.
> Luxury german cars are expensive too, but t
Alan Chan posted his reasons:
>
> I think this is a rather subjective matter. From my point of view, MX was a
> simple mechanical camera with very limited features. It is a great camera
> which I still use. However, when it was compared to other pro bodies of the
> same era from Canon & Nikon,
A product that was designed and manufactured to be used heavily or
professionally, doesn't mean it must be reliable. Luxury german cars are
expensive too, but that doesn't mean they are as reliable as Honda or
Toyota. And what a company claimed doesn't neceassily mean it must be true.
It is per
Pentax made the MX and introduced it to the world as a pro 35mm camera.
Subsequently made the LX and introduced it to the world as a pro 35mm
camera.
Much later also introduced the PZ1 as a pro 35mm camera. I was wondering
what
Mr Alan Chan's reason was for declaring that the LX was the only true
inal Message -
> From: "Peter Alling"
> Subject: Re: LX Questions
>
>
> > Forced?
>
> Well, some came along willingly..
>
> William Robb
>
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: LX Questions
>
>
> William Robb wrote:
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Steve Pearson"
> > Subject: LX Questions
> >
>
Well William should be pleased one of my LX's has suffered a failure. I
think it
was the fault of the CLA it received shortly before I bought it.
At 12:25 AM 1/30/2003 +, Paul wrote:
William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Steve Pearson"
>
Peter Alling posted:
> (Let's not get into the what's a professional or professional camera et.
> al. again, Please).
Oh. Sorry. By the way I sent my second post on this thread before reading the
above.
However, it *is* a bit more on-topic than some of the other issues that are
fought about her
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 11:16 PM, Peter Alling wrote:
Forced?
'e's well known as a horribly incorrigible bully. Just as likely to
give you a wedgie up to your ears as the time o'day. I wouldn't mess
with 'im.
Dan Scott
Does anyone own the Y2K LX version? What does one of
those bad boys sell for?
--- William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Peter Alling"
> Subject: Re: LX Questions
>
>
> > Forced?
>
> Well, som
William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Steve Pearson"
> Subject: LX Questions
>
> I have a love/hate relationship with the LX. My three have been just about
> the most unreliable pieces of junk imaginable.
My single LX has now exposed 1500
- Original Message -
From:
Subject: Re: LX Questions
I was wondering what
> Mr Alan Chan's reason was for declaring that the LX was the only true pro
35mm
> camera Pentax ever
> produced.
Perhaps because it is??
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Alling"
Subject: Re: LX Questions
> Forced?
Well, some came along willingly..
William Robb
About the quality of your results will an LX be better?
In a word no.
Ok, now for the only real exposure difference. The LX
measures the exposure while you're taking the photograph.
For most practical purposes this is meaningless for shutter
speeds above 1/60th of a second. For longer shutter s
List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 4:48 PM
Subject: LX Questions
> Hi all. I'm in the market for an LX. Currently have
> a Super Program & an MX. Thinking about selling both
> to acquire the LX, and I have a few questions for
> curr
Hi all. I'm in the market for an LX. Currently have
a Super Program & an MX. Thinking about selling both
to acquire the LX, and I have a few questions for
current LX owners.
Have I read something about the LX having some kind of
on board circutry, or computer, that helps with
exposure? Is ther
>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 3:07 PM
Subject: Re: -=-LX questions-=-
>
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 02:48:12 +
> > Subject: -=-LX questions-=-
> >
> >
> > ... the equally hard to find strap lugs.
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 02:48:12 +
> Subject: -=-LX questions-=-
>
>
> ... the equally hard to find strap lugs.
>
> Some people have recommended buying an LX on
> EBay with
> the grip, then reselling the camera without the gr
Exactly. Perhaps Mike will publish a a new Best 25 list in his newsletter, now that he
has seen the light.
Doug
At 2:48 AM +7/10/01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] donned the ruby slippers, tapped the heels
together three times, and chanted:
>Welcome to the LX __ mysteriously absent from the
>PT To
Welcome to the LX __ mysteriously absent from the
PT Top
25 Cameras.
I got my Grip Bs at Keh, although they haven't had
any in
a while.
Camera Direct lists the Grip B [the preformed grip
youdon't have to carve yourself]. They're at
www.camera-direct.com. Although they're in
England, I'v
Cambridge Camera still advertises the LX as availble...doesn't list a price,
so you'll have to call...(212) 675-8600
Jim
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 4:46 PM
Subject: -=-LX que
Hi,
I have a GripA that you can have. its been shaped.
Cya
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 9:46 AM
Subject: -=-LX questions-=-
> A few LX questions:
>
> Has anybody
A few LX questions:
Has anybody got a grip to sell?
If not, could anybody loan me a grip for a week to try? I'll pay for postage
and send you something nifty when I return it.
Anybody got an FA-2 finder to sell?
Does anybody know if there are still LX's available new anywher
40 matches
Mail list logo
