No argument: MX is a fine camera and I regret selling it to finance the LX - I only had it for about 4 years and I did experience the flaky diodes described in your post. This was repaired and it worked OK after that. But there have been a number of posts about problems with the MX on this list - no such posts about the plain ME. My ME is from 1978 (is that early?) and the lightmeter has been adjusted once, a few years ago. It is on its third battery set (in 23 years) so battery dependence is not a big issue. I have had two ME Supers and they did not give me any trouble but I did have to check several in (used) ones order to find perfectly working samples. The first Winder ME II I had functioned on its original battery set for about 5 years, and would have done so for a long time but then I sold it. After some time I thought I did miss the winder and bought one, used. I have had it for 2 years now and the batteries are in excellent health. When the strap (non-Pentax) let go the ME, winder and lens hit the ground, the 3.5/35-105 was bent beyond repair but no damage to the ME or winder. IMO the ME is one rugged camera. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -----Alkuperäinen viesti----- Lähettäjä: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 30. elokuuta 2001 14:16 Aihe: Re: Vs: MZ-S vs. LX > >>I have one of the first MX's sold in the US. Bought the first week it was >>available, (damn I feel old writing that). The meter was always a bit >flaky, never worked the way the manual said it should, in spite of being back >to Pentax for repair. However once I got used to it, the camera never let >me down. The meter still works, (still flaky though). A ME will not give you >a lot of latitude if it's batteries fail, a MX will only lose meter function. > >I've found that the MX is more reliable than either the ME or ME Super. >The early MEs were particularly problematic and Pentax came up with a modification >kit of some sort for them. (I don't recall the details but it's in the service >notes with my on-line service manual at http://www.robertstech.com/pentax.htm) > >ME Supers have occasional electronic problems due to contact resistance >building up in the ribbon cable where it plugs into a socket buried deep >within the camera. I've also seen quite a few with terminal shutter and >mirror lock. > >I have seen MXs with problems (I've heard about, but never seen, the meter >problem) but that's usually more a product of the extensive use (and abuse) >their owners give them. (A car with 200,000 miles on the clock can be expected >to have more problems than one with 20,000, right? Most MX owners *use* >their cameras. Plenty of ME Super owners were just occasional snapshooters.) > >If you can find a "low mileage" example and/or one that's been taken care >of you'll love it. > >-- >Mark Roberts >www.robertstech.com > > > - 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 .
