RE: MZ-S vs. LX
I think my LX is in great condition. For what I paid (much below others I've seen) it looks, feels, operates as if new. My idea of an MX for backup is that the MX is FULLY mechanical with the batteries only needed for the meter and exposure control is full manual, with no auto modes. Yes, the LX's shutter works without batteries from X-1/2000. Christian, IMHO the MX is a great backup body - in fact for 22 years I've used them as MAIN bodies and in that time I've never had a problem with one of them, and the other one needed a minor adjustment. Of course, this isn't to say that MXs don't have their fair share of problems, but I doubt that they are 'not that reliable' as one contributor put it. In fact, because the batteries only power the meter, I would say that the MX is more reliable! FWIW, Cotty ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads www.macads.co.uk - 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 .
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 .
RE: MZ-S vs. LX
Incidentally, I finally took the time to check my LX's serial number. It's a 530. Newish? Christian Skofteland System Administrator ServerVault Inc. Securing the Internet (703)373-5971 (Direct) (703)333-5900 (Main) [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: PAUL STENQUIST [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 9:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MZ-S vs. LX I shoot with my LX almost exclusively. (I erred in a previous message, it's a 527 serial number.) I have an MX that serves as a backup. Sometimes I'll take just the MX when I'm traveling a long way for a short time. But it's hard to put the LX down. I also have screwmount cameras that are more collectibles than working units. But I'll sometimes use one when I'm shooting BW and color. I hate to let all that wonderful SMC Tak glass just sit around and not make pictures. In fact, my September PUG, which I shot just a few weeks ago, was a product of my Spotmatic F and SMC Tak 85/1.8. But the LX gets a workout almost every day. Paul Skofteland, Christian wrote: I think my LX is in great condition. For what I paid (much below others I've seen) it looks, feels, operates as if new. My idea of an MX for backup is that the MX is FULLY mechanical with the batteries only needed for the meter and exposure control is full manual, with no auto modes. Yes, the LX's shutter works without batteries from X-1/2000. The other thing that attracts me to the MX is DOF preview. Being a nature photographer doing a lot of closeup work makes this feature essential in any camera. I think the LX is the end-all-be-all of camera systems and I couldn't be happier with it. Christian Skofteland System Administrator ServerVault Inc. Securing the Internet (703)373-5971 (Direct) (703)333-5900 (Main) [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Raimo Korhonen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Vs: MZ-S vs. LX The LX will probably outlive you - but if you think you need a back-up the plain ME seems to me to be the most reliable - nothing much to go wrong (on mine the light meter was adjusted after 20 years) and batteries last very, very long (on Winder ME II too). MX seems to be not that reliable and the buttons on ME Super can give trouble. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Skofteland, Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vastaanottaja: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Päivä: 29. elokuuta 2001 14:36 Aihe: RE: MZ-S vs. LX You guys are starting to worry me! I just bought my first LX and have put only a few rolls through it so far. How much life can I expect from this camera? Let's put it this way: I don't intend to replace it! And honestly, for my application (nature/wildlife/landscape), I see no reason to own a brand new camera. I'm looking at buying full mechanical backups such as an MX but I have no need for program modes or autofocus. Christian Skofteland System Administrator ServerVault Inc. Securing the Internet (703)373-5971 (Direct) (703)333-5900 (Main) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 . - 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 . - 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 . - 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 .
Vs: Vs: MZ-S vs. LX
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 .
Re: MZ-S vs. LX
That's good to hear, Paul. So far I've had the shutter mechanism, metering, and TTL systems repaired. TTL seems to be the one thing that doesn't get fixed correctly. I'm hoping to see it back here soon! - MCC At 11:14 PM 8/28/01 -0400, you wrote: Hi Mark, My LX serial number starts with 523. It has the second meter button but not the latest shutter curtain. After a complete CLA two years ago and a follow-up return trip to fix what wasn't fixed correctly, it has been perfect for a couple of years and several hundred rolls of film. Paul - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - - - - - - - - - Photos: http://www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - -
Re: MZ-S vs. LX
Hi Mark ... Well, let's see, I've owned five or six LX, with SN in the 522, 523, and, I think, 525 series, plus newer ones in the 535 series. The way I understand it is that the earlier models (yours included) had the old shutter box and old style shutter. These are prone to sticky mirror. The later models have the new shutter, and, from what I've read, a redesigned shutter box, with improvements and changes in the bumpers, etc., and these are not supposed to be susceptible to sticky mirror. Apart from that, I believe the newer models have somewhat better insulated and more durable electronic connections, and the finish on the newer bodies is different than that on the older bodies. It's more matte-like, which I prefer, while possibly being more durable (just guessing on that one). Older LX had problems with frame spacing, and sometimes the frames even overlapped. The frame spacing on the newer models is a lot more accurate. Further, the newer cameras have all the improvements that Pentax added over the years, while some of the older ones only have some of the features. So, for what is often about the same purchase price, I'd look for the newer version. Mark Cassino wrote: At 07:05 PM 8/27/01 -0700, Shel wrote: Bruce - it depends on which LX it is. I'd stay away from an earlier one at almost any price. How early do you mean, Shel? I love my LX but it has been in the shop 3x now (though the most recent was an immediate bounce back to Pentax.) My S/N starts with 523 - not the earliest but still in the mid '80s I think. -- Sheldon Belinkoff CREATURE'S COMFORT 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 .
Re: MZ-S vs. LX
Shel wrote: Apart from that, I believe the newer models have somewhat better insulated and more durable electronic connections, and the finish on the newer bodies is different than that on the older bodies. It's more matte-like, which I prefer, while possibly being more durable (just guessing on that one). The newer finish is morer resistant to scratches but more prone to brassing due to wear. Pål - 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 .
RE: MZ-S vs. LX
You guys are starting to worry me! I just bought my first LX and have put only a few rolls through it so far. How much life can I expect from this camera? Let's put it this way: I don't intend to replace it! And honestly, for my application (nature/wildlife/landscape), I see no reason to own a brand new camera. I'm looking at buying full mechanical backups such as an MX but I have no need for program modes or autofocus. Christian Skofteland System Administrator ServerVault Inc. Securing the Internet (703)373-5971 (Direct) (703)333-5900 (Main) [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 7:28 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MZ-S vs. LX Shel wrote: Apart from that, I believe the newer models have somewhat better insulated and more durable electronic connections, and the finish on the newer bodies is different than that on the older bodies. It's more matte-like, which I prefer, while possibly being more durable (just guessing on that one). The newer finish is morer resistant to scratches but more prone to brassing due to wear. Pål - 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 . - 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 .
RE: MZ-S vs. LX
I guess it depends on how long it has been sitting on the shelf. The one I got new in NY in 1985 has a s/n that starts with 523. As a matter of fact my other two are also 523s. César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida -Original Message- From: Pål Jensen [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 7:27 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MZ-S vs. LX My S/N starts with 523 - not the earliest but still in the mid '80s I think. I think it must be a very early model. Mine starts with 526 and was bought new in 1981. Pål - 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 .
Vs: MZ-S vs. LX
The LX will probably outlive you - but if you think you need a back-up the plain ME seems to me to be the most reliable - nothing much to go wrong (on mine the light meter was adjusted after 20 years) and batteries last very, very long (on Winder ME II too). MX seems to be not that reliable and the buttons on ME Super can give trouble. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Skofteland, Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vastaanottaja: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Päivä: 29. elokuuta 2001 14:36 Aihe: RE: MZ-S vs. LX You guys are starting to worry me! I just bought my first LX and have put only a few rolls through it so far. How much life can I expect from this camera? Let's put it this way: I don't intend to replace it! And honestly, for my application (nature/wildlife/landscape), I see no reason to own a brand new camera. I'm looking at buying full mechanical backups such as an MX but I have no need for program modes or autofocus. Christian Skofteland System Administrator ServerVault Inc. Securing the Internet (703)373-5971 (Direct) (703)333-5900 (Main) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 .
Vs: MZ-S vs. LX
Nope - my very old LX (20 years) has never had any frame spacing problems - and I think that LX frame spacing is more accurate than most because it allows 1) multi exposures and 2) rewind to previously exposed frame - and it had these characteristics from the beginning. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Creature's Comfort [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Päivä: 29. elokuuta 2001 8:40 Aihe: Re: MZ-S vs. LX Hi Mark ... Well, let's see, I've owned five or six LX, with SN in the 522, 523, and, I think, 525 series, plus newer ones in the 535 series. The way I understand it is that the earlier models (yours included) had the old shutter box and old style shutter. These are prone to sticky mirror. The later models have the new shutter, and, from what I've read, a redesigned shutter box, with improvements and changes in the bumpers, etc., and these are not supposed to be susceptible to sticky mirror. Apart from that, I believe the newer models have somewhat better insulated and more durable electronic connections, and the finish on the newer bodies is different than that on the older bodies. It's more matte-like, which I prefer, while possibly being more durable (just guessing on that one). Older LX had problems with frame spacing, and sometimes the frames even overlapped. The frame spacing on the newer models is a lot more accurate. Further, the newer cameras have all the improvements that Pentax added over the years, while some of the older ones only have some of the features. So, for what is often about the same purchase price, I'd look for the newer version. Mark Cassino wrote: At 07:05 PM 8/27/01 -0700, Shel wrote: Bruce - it depends on which LX it is. I'd stay away from an earlier one at almost any price. How early do you mean, Shel? I love my LX but it has been in the shop 3x now (though the most recent was an immediate bounce back to Pentax.) My S/N starts with 523 - not the earliest but still in the mid '80s I think. -- Sheldon Belinkoff CREATURE'S COMFORT 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 .
Re: MZ-S vs. LX
I shoot with my LX almost exclusively. (I erred in a previous message, it's a 527 serial number.) I have an MX that serves as a backup. Sometimes I'll take just the MX when I'm traveling a long way for a short time. But it's hard to put the LX down. I also have screwmount cameras that are more collectibles than working units. But I'll sometimes use one when I'm shooting BW and color. I hate to let all that wonderful SMC Tak glass just sit around and not make pictures. In fact, my September PUG, which I shot just a few weeks ago, was a product of my Spotmatic F and SMC Tak 85/1.8. But the LX gets a workout almost every day. Paul Skofteland, Christian wrote: I think my LX is in great condition. For what I paid (much below others I've seen) it looks, feels, operates as if new. My idea of an MX for backup is that the MX is FULLY mechanical with the batteries only needed for the meter and exposure control is full manual, with no auto modes. Yes, the LX's shutter works without batteries from X-1/2000. The other thing that attracts me to the MX is DOF preview. Being a nature photographer doing a lot of closeup work makes this feature essential in any camera. I think the LX is the end-all-be-all of camera systems and I couldn't be happier with it. Christian Skofteland System Administrator ServerVault Inc. Securing the Internet (703)373-5971 (Direct) (703)333-5900 (Main) [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Raimo Korhonen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Vs: MZ-S vs. LX The LX will probably outlive you - but if you think you need a back-up the plain ME seems to me to be the most reliable - nothing much to go wrong (on mine the light meter was adjusted after 20 years) and batteries last very, very long (on Winder ME II too). MX seems to be not that reliable and the buttons on ME Super can give trouble. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Skofteland, Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vastaanottaja: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Päivä: 29. elokuuta 2001 14:36 Aihe: RE: MZ-S vs. LX You guys are starting to worry me! I just bought my first LX and have put only a few rolls through it so far. How much life can I expect from this camera? Let's put it this way: I don't intend to replace it! And honestly, for my application (nature/wildlife/landscape), I see no reason to own a brand new camera. I'm looking at buying full mechanical backups such as an MX but I have no need for program modes or autofocus. Christian Skofteland System Administrator ServerVault Inc. Securing the Internet (703)373-5971 (Direct) (703)333-5900 (Main) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 . - 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 . - 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 .
MZ-S vs. LX
I'm curious. At least Pål, and maybe others have both LX and MZ-S. We have compared quite often the PZ-1p and MZ-S, but not really the LX vs. MZ-S. Other than low light metering, is there anything else about the LX that would have you keep both bodies? Anybody with experience? Bruce Dayton Sacramento, CA - 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 .
Re: MZ-S vs. LX
Bruce wrote: I'm curious. At least Pål, and maybe others have both LX and MZ-S. We have compared quite often the PZ-1p and MZ-S, but not really the LX vs. MZ-S. Other than low light metering, is there anything else about the LX that would have you keep both bodies? Anybody with experience? I've used the LX for 20 years and run about 70 rolls through the MZ-S so I now have firm opinions about these two cameras and how they compare to each other. Let me first say that the LX will always have a paricular place in my photography due to its low light metering capabilities. This is important to me but probably not for most photographers. The LX will keep this place until Pentax release another body that can do the same trick as the LX. I now have a camera setup consisting of the MZ-S, LX and 645n and I feel this to be a very nice combination where the different bodies can do different task and where all are really enjoyable in use. I use the MZ-S exclusively for bird photography; I never use the LX. The MZ-S pluses here are AF, metering and built in motor drive. I used the Z-1p for this use as well due to the built in motor drive and metering but I choose the MZ-S equally much because I enjoy using it. The Z-1p looked and felt odd in the companionship with my other bodies. I never took the Z-1p for landscape shooting while my MZ-S may often be the prefered choice. A case in point is using mirror prefire on both camera. On the Z-1p it ment turning a dial, pressing a button while turning another dial and scrolling trhough a meny. This had to be repeated every time the camera had been turned off. No such thing with the MZ-S. I feel the MZ-S is very much in tune with the LX but offers other functions the LX is missing. The MZ-S is not the camera I can replace an LX with. My main dissapointment with the MZ-S is it battery consumption. You can avoid this hassle with the battery grip but that makes it big and bulky. The MZ-S feels like real camera and I really don't think the LX score much compare to it when it comes to feel and built. I would choose the MZ-S over the LX if I expect to shoot Macro and/or birds whereas the LX will be the choice if there was a posibility for low light shooting. Also, due to its mechanical shutter the LX is the choice for (very) remote areas. However, what I really want is a modern version of the LX. This is more and more clear to me. Pål - 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 .
Re: MZ-S vs. LX
Thanks for the comparison. You mentioned you would like a modern LX. What does that mean? AF, spot meter? Please describe. Thanks, Bruce Dayton Sacramento, CA - Original Message - From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 1:27 PM Subject: Re: MZ-S vs. LX Bruce wrote: I'm curious. At least Pål, and maybe others have both LX and MZ-S. We have compared quite often the PZ-1p and MZ-S, but not really the LX vs. MZ-S. Other than low light metering, is there anything else about the LX that would have you keep both bodies? Anybody with experience? I've used the LX for 20 years and run about 70 rolls through the MZ-S so I now have firm opinions about these two cameras and how they compare to each other. Let me first say that the LX will always have a paricular place in my photography due to its low light metering capabilities. This is important to me but probably not for most photographers. The LX will keep this place until Pentax release another body that can do the same trick as the LX. I now have a camera setup consisting of the MZ-S, LX and 645n and I feel this to be a very nice combination where the different bodies can do different task and where all are really enjoyable in use. I use the MZ-S exclusively for bird photography; I never use the LX. The MZ-S pluses here are AF, metering and built in motor drive. I used the Z-1p for this use as well due to the built in motor drive and metering but I choose the MZ-S equally much because I enjoy using it. The Z-1p looked and felt odd in the companionship with my other bodies. I never took the Z-1p for landscape shooting while my MZ-S may often be the prefered choice. A case in point is using mirror prefire on both camera. On the Z-1p it ment turning a dial, pressing a button while turning another dial and scrolling trhough a meny. This had to be repeated every time the camera had been turned off. No such thing with the MZ-S. I feel the MZ-S is very much in tune with the LX but offers other functions the LX is m! issing. The MZ-S is not the camera I can replace an LX with. My main dissapointment with the MZ-S is it battery consumption. You can avoid this hassle with the battery grip but that makes it big and bulky. The MZ-S feels like real camera and I really don't think the LX score much compare to it when it comes to feel and built. I would choose the MZ-S over the LX if I expect to shoot Macro and/or birds whereas the LX will be the choice if there was a posibility for low light shooting. Also, due to its mechanical shutter the LX is the choice for (very) remote areas. However, what I really want is a modern version of the LX. This is more and more clear to me. Pål - 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 . - 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 .
Re: MZ-S vs. LX
Bruce Dayton wrote: Shel, didn't you get a brand new one? Indeed i did smile About what would something like that cost, including finder and screens that would be most common to use? I bought mine without a finder as I already had several finders, so I can't address that point. Likewise the screen issue. Of course, I don't know what a new LX would cost today if you could find one (although Nathan's camera in Detroit is supposed to have a few - give 'em a call). Frankly, a late model used one, with a SN above 5355*** would be a good way to go. Screens are often available from about $19.00, but I've seen some - those that are harder to find or more specialized - go for as much as about $40.00. I've been fortunate having purchased the new style screens through a friend in Japan at a very reasonable cost. is a MZ-S and LX a better combo than 2 MZ-S's? Only you can answer that question, Bruce. Speaking for myself, and the type of photography I prefer and my shooting style, I'd always want at least two of each camera body I decided to own. I outlined the reason for that in another thread. However, if you don't need that sort of compatibility, buy one of each so you can use the features appropriate to the situation on a given shoot. Some of the finders, and finder accessories, could be a reason to get an LX, all else not withstanding. -- 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 .
MZ-S and LX was( MZ-S vs. LX )
We again try to make the Do you prefer a hammer or a screw driver. takes both to build a house. I get both, thanks, Phil --- Thanks for the comparison. You mentioned you would like a modern LX. What does that mean? AF, spot meter? Please describe. Thanks, Bruce Dayton Sacramento, CA - Original Message - From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 1:27 PM Subject: Re: MZ-S vs. LX Bruce wrote: I'm curious. At least Pål, and maybe others have both LX and MZ-S. We have compared quite often the PZ-1p and MZ-S, but not really the LX vs. MZ-S. Other than low light metering, is there anything else about the LX that would have you keep both bodies? Anybody with experience? I've used the LX for 20 years and run about 70 rolls through the MZ-S so I now have firm opinions about these two cameras and how they compare to each -snip- - 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 .
A modern LX (WAS: Re: MZ-S vs. LX)
Bruce wrote: You mentioned you would like a modern LX. What does that mean? AF, spot meter? Please describe. It means AF and spot metering for sure. Otherwise it means keeping as much of essence of the LX as posible. What this really means in reality is something I would know when I see it. The fact remains that camera engineers is better than most of us of seeing deep into a camera. They may come up with brilliant things we now have no concept of or didn't think of. Pål - 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 .
Re: MZ-S vs. LX
The design philosophy of the MZ-S is much closer to that of the LX than it is to that of the PZ-1p, so I think the MZ-S and the LX make a good pair. That's the pair in my main bag right now. But you can find out for yourself, Bruce. KEH has an LX in EX+ shape right now for (!) $789US and an LN- MZ-S for $751US. Go for it. Doug At 11:27 AM -07008/27/01, Bruce Dayton wrote, or at least typed: I'm curious. At least Pål, and maybe others have both LX and MZ-S. We have compared quite often the PZ-1p and MZ-S, but not really the LX vs. MZ-S. Other than low light metering, is there anything else about the LX that would have you keep both bodies? Anybody with experience? Bruce Dayton Sacramento, CA -- Douglas Forrest Brewer Ashwood Lake Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alphoto.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 .
Re: MZ-S vs. LX
I saw the LX at KEH. I was thinking that seemed a little high. What is the concensus? KEH Ex+ condition with FA-1W finder for $789. Bruce Dayton Sacramento, CA - Original Message - From: Doug Brewer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 5:00 PM Subject: Re: MZ-S vs. LX The design philosophy of the MZ-S is much closer to that of the LX than it is to that of the PZ-1p, so I think the MZ-S and the LX make a good pair. That's the pair in my main bag right now. But you can find out for yourself, Bruce. KEH has an LX in EX+ shape right now for (!) $789US and an LN- MZ-S for $751US. Go for it. Doug At 11:27 AM -07008/27/01, Bruce Dayton wrote, or at least typed: I'm curious. At least Pål, and maybe others have both LX and MZ-S. We have compared quite often the PZ-1p and MZ-S, but not really the LX vs. MZ-S. Other than low light metering, is there anything else about the LX that would have you keep both bodies? Anybody with experience? Bruce Dayton Sacramento, CA -- Douglas Forrest Brewer Ashwood Lake Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alphoto.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 . - 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 .
Re: MZ-S vs. LX
Bruce Dayton wrote: I saw the LX at KEH. I was thinking that seemed a little high. What is the concensus? KEH Ex+ condition with FA-1W finder for $789. Bruce - it depends on which LX it is. I'd stay away from an earlier one at almost any price. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Why should I use a meter? What if the darn thing broke on me when I was out making a photograph? Then what would I do? - 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 .
Re: MZ-S vs. LX
I have the Mz-S, Pz-1p, and LX. To me, the finder on the LX is unrivaled. It is not as bright as the others and does not seem to be as sharp on the ground glass, but it offers a much bigger view of things. You really have to look through it to see what I mean. I also think that for manual focus work, there is no substitute for a split screen focusing aid. The ergonomics on the LX are also great. To be honest, all three have great ergonomics, though they are completely different in their layouts. Of the three, the LX is the most limited with relatively slow flash synch (1/75th of a second) and no spot metering. But once you pick it up and try it, you'll love it. - MCC At 11:27 AM 8/27/01 -0700, Bruce Dayton wrote: I'm curious. At least Pål, and maybe others have both LX and MZ-S. We have compared quite often the PZ-1p and MZ-S, but not really the LX vs. MZ-S. Other than low light metering, is there anything else about the LX that would have you keep both bodies? Anybody with experience? - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - - - - - - - - - Photos: http://www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - -
