Re: MX review; WAS: Why I won't be buying an MZ-S
Well naturally enough this is one of the black ones, which is why I have persevered. Paul . No other MX I have owned over the years (3) have had this. In the end I sold it (it was a silver top) in favour of a black beauty Cotty
Re: MX review; WAS: Why I won't be buying an MZ-S
I explained that I owned 4 other MXs and *none* of them displayed the same trait but the service man was unmoved. They charged me AU$180 and fixed nothing. When I tried to explain, the old guy was unmoved too. Well, actually he did, but he said I must did something to my MX. All I can say is that the service department of C.R. Kennedy is hopeless. ABSOLUTELY HOPELESS!!! Glad I don't live in Australia anymore or I would be using anything but Pentax now. regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: MX review
My MX also developed this problem. Even with the shutter lock on, any pressure on the shutter button would turn on the meter. However, when I took it in for a CLA and asked to have this fixed, the problem was solved and it never returned. It might have been the shutter lock itself, but it was ten years ago, so I'm not perfectly sure. As for the rest of the camera, I liked it very much, and it's still in my family. At the TOPDML get-together last spring, I was able to handle Frank Theriault's MX, and it brought back pleasant memories. It's a compact, well-made camera that feels good in your hand. Pat White
Re: MX review
Dear Mrs. Reed, I thought the MX review was very interesting too, but what surprises me ~ in light of what the reviewer said about the KX ~ is that you HAD a KX and didn't like it! After reading Lon Williamson's review, I thought I just might want to have one! Now I wonder. What did I miss? Why don't/didn't you like the KX? I seem to recall he said it was like a pre-LX design...that sounded pretty interesting to me. I do have an MX body, and I just got it a few days ago, but haven't had time to really wring it out. I am really looking forward to road-testing it, however. Your thoughts on the KX? keith whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm hoping to acquire an MX in the near future, so the review was interesting and timely to me. I used to have a KX for a while and didn't like it; my favourite shooters just now are my LX and ZX-5n. While I wait, does anyone want to share his or her thoughts on LX vs. MX?
Re: MX review
I'm hoping to acquire an MX in the near future, so the review was interesting and timely to me. I used to have a KX for a while and didn't like it; my favourite shooters just now are my LX and ZX-5n. While I wait, does anyone want to share his or her thoughts on LX vs. MX? Despite the fact that both were marketed as professional system cameras, they are nothing alike other than interchangable screens. Compared to the LX, the MX: - has much quieter shutter/mirror - is smaller (great for small lenses, could be front heavy for certain lenses) - has higher viewfinder magnification (the highest, same as ME Super) - doesn't have interchangable finder - is fully mechanical, obviousely - has shorter mirror - is more reliable (imho) - is easier to service - has at least 2 versions afaik (slightly different top, memo holder, metering ICs, and some other minor differences inside) - ??? regards, Alan Chan _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: MX review
I also want to add here that the MX is far more easier to find on the 2nd hand market and goes for much lower prices (usually the third of the LX price), especially if you add the cost of a complete CLA for the LX if you want it to be reliable. This and the fact that it is much smaller, lighter and quieter make it a far better choice, IMHO, when you take it with you to weird and unknown places in the world, especially in Africa, South America, India... (unless you can afford a bodyguard of course, then the LX maybe is a better choice) The noise of the mirror has always been a big concern for me since I'am always trying to capture candid people expressions anywhere, and this is the concern that makes me wonder regularly of old M Leicas. But anyway I don't have enough money now for this kind of tools. As an MX user, one of the things I like most about this little camera is the big uncluttered viewfinder, especially bright with an LX2000 screen. I also use a K1000 and an MZ-5n sometimes but it is always a shock for me when I have to put my eye through the viewfinder after some MX photo-sessions. It's like movie theater versus home television. Btw, the MX is still my favourite camera, and i take it with me whenever I need a reliable camera. Though, after reading Lon Williamson's MX/KX comparison, I must say i'll maybe try a KX one day, a camera I have absolutely no experience with. Thanks for the nice review Lon. Just some personal thoughts. Thibault Grouas. « Alan Chan » [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : Despite the fact that both were marketed as professional system cameras, they are nothing alike other than interchangable screens. Compared to the LX, the MX: - has much quieter shutter/mirror - is smaller (great for small lenses, could be front heavy for certain lenses) - has higher viewfinder magnification (the highest, same as ME Super) - doesn't have interchangable finder - is fully mechanical, obviousely - has shorter mirror - is more reliable (imho) - is easier to service - has at least 2 versions afaik (slightly different top, memo holder, metering ICs, and some other minor differences inside) - ???
Re: MX review
Cotty wrote: Just on that subject, 1 of my MXs had a problem draining batteries. I took it to the local Pentax importer (CR Kennedy) and asked for it to be fixed. $130 (US$70) later they handed it back and pronounced it fixed. I went on holidays and when I pulled the camera out of the bag the brand new battery was dead. After replacing the battery and fidling around a bit I found that even with the meter lock in place, a bit more pressure than normal would turn the meter on. I figure that it must have something heavy (probably 300 Tak in hard case) sitting on the soft case, pushing on the shutter release. I took it home and compared it to my other MXs, and none of them would do that, so I figured it was a fault, probably just slightly out of alignment. When I took it back to Kennedy's they said that it was normal, and that of course if I applied a lot more pressure the meter would go on. I explained that I owned 4 other MXs and *none* of them displayed the same trait but the service man was unmoved. Net result is that I now take the batteries out of the MXs when travelling or storing and I have taken my LX elsewhere to be repaired and will probably take the 6x7 there as well. I used to own a MX that has this problem. It was definately a fault - in no way should the meter be activated while the shutter release lock is engaged, no matter how much pressure is applied. No other MX I have owned over the years (3) have had this. In the end I sold it (it was a silver top) in favour of a black beauty This is a very common problem with the MX and one that's extraordinarily easy to repair. It's an adjustment that can be done in a matter of minutes and only requires removing the bottom plate (3 screws). -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: MX review
Keith Whaley posted: I thought the MX review was very interesting too, but what surprises me ~ in light of what the reviewer said about the KX ~ is that you HAD a KX and didn't like it! After reading Lon Williamson's review, I thought I just might want to have one! Now I wonder. What did I miss? Why don't/didn't you like the KX? I seem to recall he said it was like a pre-LX design...that sounded pretty interesting to me. I do have an MX body, and I just got it a few days ago, but haven't had time to really wring it out. I am really looking forward to road-testing it, however. Your thoughts on the KX? In the first place, when I bought the KX it had been several years since I'd last owned a K1000 and my Pentax bodies since then had all been smaller. Found I wasn't that comfortable going back to the big bodies. Secondly, although I understand this doesn't bother many people, I found that having to keep the winding lever in a stand-off position to use the meter was a distraction -- I'd never owned a camera with that requirement before. It wasn't that there was anything *wrong* with the camera; just one of those subtle handling not-quite-me issues that sometimes present themselves and make the difference between a camera you happily reach for and use, and the one on the shelf you reach past to get to the one you like using. So I bought the LX and as soon as I'd established that the LX was working properly, sold the KX to partially offset the investment in the LX.
Re: MX review
Comments within... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keith Whaley posted: I thought the MX review was very interesting too, but what surprises me ~ in light of what the reviewer said about the KX ~ is that you HAD a KX and didn't like it! After reading Lon Williamson's review, I thought I just might want to have one! Now I wonder. What did I miss? Why don't/didn't you like the KX? I seem to recall he said it was like a pre-LX design...that sounded pretty interesting to me. I do have an MX body, and I just got it a few days ago, but haven't had time to really wring it out. I am really looking forward to road-testing it, however. Your thoughts on the KX? In the first place, when I bought the KX it had been several years since I'd last owned a K1000 and my Pentax bodies since then had all been smaller. Found I wasn't that comfortable going back to the big bodies. I went from an Olympus OM-1 to an OM-2, to a Pentax MG, to a Spotmatic F, to an MX. Even in that sequence, the MX is SMALL... I really like the small size of the MX! Secondly, although I understand this doesn't bother many people, I found that having to keep the winding lever in a stand-off position to use the meter was a distraction -- I'd never owned a camera with that requirement before. Nor I, but I don't yet have enough time behind the shutter with my MX to know... It wasn't that there was anything *wrong* with the camera; just one of those subtle handling not-quite-me issues that sometimes present themselves and make the difference between a camera you happily reach for and use, and the one on the shelf you reach past to get to the one you like using. So I bought the LX and as soon as I'd established that the LX was working properly, sold the KX to partially offset the investment in the LX. I'm familiar with that! grin Thanks for your comments. keith whaley
