The LX is an amazingly good camera for low light work. I've made perfect exposures in a room that was completely dark but for a flickering TV screen, the light from which was constantly changing. The LX, with the shutter open, just kept measuring the light until the proper exposure was made, times varied between around twenty to forty seconds. That evening I got 36 perfectly exposed shots. Portraits by TV light ... y'gotta love it! Add the new, brighter focusing screens and a fast lens, and you've got a real low-light shooter. The nice thing with the LX is that if the light changes during exposure, the metering system adjust while the exposure is being made.
Although I prefer the MX for daily shooting, it doesn't hold a candle to the LX in low light situations. Shel "You meet the nicest people with a Pentax" > [Original Message] > From: Godfrey DiGiorgi < > Hmm. Honestly, I'd go for an MX over an LX but then I always > preferred the Nikon FM/FE over the F2-3 as well (except for the hp > viewfinder). In truly low light, I never bother with the meter ... I > use a Kodak Pocket Photo Guide with its table of available light > exposure suggestions. :-) > On Nov 8, 2005, at 7:31 PM, Adam Maas wrote: > > > Couple of Reasons. The LX meters down to EV-6.5 (I shoot a lot of > > low-light stuff), offers aperture priority, a winder (I've been > > spoiled by my AF Nikons), solid build and TTL flash. It's also > > likely to still work in 5 years.
