RE: unique LX

[Alan Chan]

I think most people did not realize Pentax 135 has never meant to be a 
professional system. The LX was the only effort trying to change that, but 
failed (they did not commit themselves that much anyway). Since the very 
early stage, Asahi Pentax was designed and manufactured for the mass market, 
which means non-professional shooters. And because of that, it is quite 
unrealistic to expect Pentax to release any F5 or EOS-1v equivalence, 
especially when they consider their professional products mean 645 & 67.

Regards,
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
Well, the MX was a camera system, missing only the interchangeable
finders.  I don't think it or any other M camera was built to the
same standard as the LX.  I'm not convinced that the MX was INTENDED
to be an LX-level camera for all that most people seem to love it, but the
KX/MX/LX naming scheme makes me wonder.
On paper, the MZ-S doesn't impress me, but it is unusually expensive for a
Pentax and has a dedicated following.  It is the current top-of-the-line,
but I wouldn't say, for example, MZ-S is to EOS1V as LX was to F1, or
MZ-S is to F5 as LX was to F3.  Realistically MZ-S is more like 1/2 an F5
or EOS-1V, but also at half the price.
_________________________________________________________________
Free yourself from those irritating pop-up ads with MSn Premium. Get 2months 
FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines