The MX is the least favorite camera of mine. I've used it twice, maybe three times, in 2½ years. It feels flimsy, the film advance is non-linear, and it sounds like a cheap piece of goods.
Wendy Beard wrote: > > At 19:41 21-10-2001 -0400, Mark Roberts wrote: > > >Many people, myself included, often praise the MX because it's fully > >functional, > >except for the light meter, without batteries. Well, yes, being all-mechanical > >is a great feature of the MX, but the *real* reason for having one is because > >it's a great camera that's small enough to throw in your bag "just in case". > > Absolutely! > And it's been my camera of choice on cycling trips. Two weeks cycle camping > in the pyrennees type trips that is. > Fits beautifully in a handlebar bag, bum bag, shirt back pocket, or just > slung over the shoulder just ready for taking snaps of the view or fellow > cyclists puffing up the mountains behind you. > Mine has survived over 18 years of being thrown in my bag. > Eehhh, they don't make 'em like they used to! > > Wendy -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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 .
