[pentaxpete]

I hope it doesn't have the infamous 'Sticky Mirror' Syndrome that my 'Late' LX has and lets me down and my earlier one no longer works on 'Auto' exposure. NO Probs with my SV, Spotmatic I and F, KX, ME Supers etc

[LesDMess]

In my experience electronics don't age well.

I don't know how your experience compares to mine - I've been immersed in electronics personally and professionally since 1975, but electronics age far better than mechanical. Example as shown below is my 1979 Heathkit ET-3400. Notice that electronically it is fully functional as evidenced by the LED spelling out CPU UP. Mechanically it is missing the #2 key.



And this is older than my LX's and far more complex too with a 6800 CPU, 1K of ROM and 256 bytes of RAM . . .

[ChrisPlatt]

Your old Heathkit trainer does not represent typical consumer electronic products;
witness the large discrete components and socketed off-the-shelf integrated circuits.
Any part that fails can easily be tested and replaced - that's what makes it a trainer.
Heathkit went bust before the advent of SMT components or flexible circuit boards.

I graduated tech school in the mid-1980's with a certificate in electronic technology
and have worked professionally ever since then as electronic technician, computer
and data communication field engineer etc. I have some exposure to electronics.

Given my experience I'll always choose the mechanical, non-battery dependent camera.

Chris

[LesDMess]

Your old Heathkit trainer does not represent typical consumer electronic products;
witness the large discrete components and socketed off-the-shelf integrated circuits.
Any part that fails can easily be tested and replaced - that's what makes it a trainer.
Chris

The ET-3400 is far more complex and mathematically has many more points of failure due to hand assembly and soldering as in this case. (Fortunately I am NASA certified to do this. It would have been so cool to have the LX as a kit camera that could be assembled with manuals!) When used for it's purpose to train someone who may not know what they are doing, catastrophic failure can be introduced. (Fortunately I know everything about this from analog to digital components down to each clock cycle of the op code.) This is not unlike our manual cameras where an unfamiliar user can introduce catastrophic failures. Over time it has proven that a more reliable camera is one that has less user interface. And we all know that an unfamiliar user is a dangerous thing . . .

With your experience you should know by now the difference between repairable and reliable as they are inversely proportional. The more repairable means the less reliable and visa versa. No doubt there are likely few who would know more about this product then I do. Hopefully, I would get as familiar with the LX - and others in my use, over time. Until then, having two fully functional LX's doubles the odds in my favor. Of course, tripling the odds in my favor would be even better . . .

BTW, I wish I could post photos of where I work as I am sure you may find it interesting as it involves super high powered electronic equipment from the 40's. Just turning them on is an adventure! It is like the twilight zone . . .

---

Last edited by LesDMess; 12-10-2016 at 08:38 AM.

[Xmas]

Your old Heathkit trainer does not represent typical consumer electronic products;
witness the large discrete components and socketed off-the-shelf integrated circuits.
Any part that fails can easily be tested and replaced - that's what makes it a trainer.
Heathkit went bust before the advent of SMT components or flexible circuit boards.

I graduated tech school in the mid-1980's with a certificate in electronic technology
and have worked professionally ever since then as electronic technician, computer
and data communication field engineer etc. I have some exposure to electronics.

Given my experience I'll always choose the mechanical, non-battery dependent camera.

Chris

Flexirigid PCBs are invention of devil.

[dsmithhfx]

the difference between repairable and reliable as they are inversely proportional

Most consumer electronics produced since the ~70s are neither.

[Eyewanders]

The ET-3400 is far more complex and mathematically has many more points of failure due to hand assembly and soldering as in this case. (Fortunately I am NASA certified to do this. It would have been so cool to have the LX as a kit camera that could be assembled with manuals!) When used for it's purpose to train someone who may not know what they are doing, catastrophic failure can be introduced. (Fortunately I know everything about this from analog to digital components down to each clock cycle of the op code.) This is not unlike our manual cameras where an unfamiliar user can introduce catastrophic failures. Over time it has proven that a more reliable camera is one that has less user interface. And we all know that an unfamiliar user is a dangerous thing . . .

With your experience you should know by now the difference between repairable and reliable as they are inversely proportional. The more repairable means the less reliable and visa versa. No doubt there are likely few who would know more about this product then I do. Hopefully, I would get as familiar with the LX - and others in my use, over time. Until then, having two fully functional LX's doubles the odds in my favor. Of course, tripling the odds in my favor would be even better . . .

BTW, I wish I could post photos of where I work as I am sure you may find it interesting as it involves super high powered electronic equipment from the 40's. Just turning them on is an adventure! It is like the twilight zone . . .

I'm not sure what the point of this narrative is and am certainly no electrician or engineer, but amidst all the horn-tooting it seems that the growing number of LX bodies with circuit board related problems (mine included) which Eric and other techs have declined to service or otherwise attempted and failed, these should be forwarded on to you for repair. Do you have a going rate?

[LesDMess]

I'm not sure what the point of this narrative is and am certainly no electrician or engineer, but amidst all the horn-tooting it seems that the growing number of LX bodies with circuit board related problems (mine included) which Eric and other techs have declined to service or otherwise attempted and failed, these should be forwarded on to you for repair. Do you have a going rate?

Apologies for the perceived horn tooting. No doubt on the internet, we can represent ourselves factually or not . . .

Obviously we can only attest to our own experiences. Since I have not yet encountered any failures of any kind with my LX's - which I have used extensively now for over 7 years, I can only speak highly of them.

BTW, with regards to "techs have declined to service or otherwise attempted and failed", there are other considerations besides skill and economics. For instance I used to fix various consumer electronics for friends but it didn't take long before I turned them down because they were irreparable or parts no longer available. Truthfully it just wasn't worth my time - since I only charged them for parts and my time was free, and they believed any problems thereafter was due to my work. Of course it is entirely possible I didn't know what I was doing, but I think that is highly unlikely . . .

---------- Post added 12-10-16 at 02:17 PM ----------

Most consumer electronics produced since the ~70s are neither.

No doubt costs being the main factor.

[Eyewanders]

Apologies for the perceived horn tooting. No doubt on the internet, we can represent ourselves factually or not . . .

Obviously we can only attest to our own experiences. Since I have not yet encountered any failures of any kind with my LX's - which I have used extensively now for over 7 years, I can only speak highly of them.

BTW, with regards to "techs have declined to service or otherwise attempted and failed", there are other considerations besides skill and economics. For instance I used to fix various consumer electronics for friends but it didn't take long before I turned them down because they were irreparable or parts no longer available. Truthfully it just wasn't worth my time - since I only charged them for parts and my time was free, and they believed any problems thereafter was due to my work. Of course it is entirely possible I didn't know what I was doing, but I think that is highly unlikely . . .

---------- Post added 12-10-16 at 02:17 PM ----------



No doubt costs being the main factor.

No worries, I was just poking a bit of fun though I do wish you'd repair mine. Quite honestly I think the thing to be gleaned from this exchange is simple that not all electronics are created equal, nor are all mechanics. The mechanics of the LX are sound. The electronics less so.
A quote from Eric Hendrickson a couple months ago:

I've spent more time and money trying to get these LX's fixed for my customer's that I'm just breaking even. I may not continue repairing them because of this very reason that you find yourself in... I've spent a lot of time trying to get it to work but not successful in doing so. I can't fix it without a circuit board. I'll return it on Monday."

A sad ordeal.

[LesDMess]

The mechanics of the LX are sound. The electronics less so.

Is your LX still usable as a fully mechanical camera (shutter speeds sync speed on up and bulb) sans metering and aperture priority mode?

[Eyewanders]

Is your LX still usable as a fully mechanical camera (shutter speeds sync speed on up and bulb) sans metering and aperture priority mode?

Yes. Sync and above speeds all seem fine thus far. Problems occur frequently in priority mode and occasionally in manual slower-than-sync speeds. It's been getting ever-so-slightly worse over the past 3 or so years. It was with Eric for CLA just a bit over a year ago, then again with him for over 6-months total (because these original symptoms for which I sent it to him for repair persisted) from last spring until sometime in September.

[LesDMess]

Good to know that the mechanical portion of the hybrid system works in case of electronic failure. If the meter still works too then that is also good to know that it is separate. Thanks!

[Eyewanders]

Good to know that the mechanical portion of the hybrid system works in case of electronic failure. If the meter still works too then that is also good to know that it is separate. Thanks!

I have had the shutter seize (as it normally does - the exposure begins but does not finish and the mirror remains up until you move the speed selector to a faster-than-sync value) once that I recall at a fast speed - probably in the 1/250 range, but IIRC it was in priority mode. Unfortunately for me personally, this problem is catastrophic to value of the camera and the love I have for it; were it just priority mode that was affected but not the meter, that would only mean you were losing out on a "convenience" feature as well as not being able to utilize the remarkable TTL/OTF metering. That would suck, but at least be livable, however the slower manual speeds also running the risk of ruined exposures simply makes the camera a shadow of it's former self. So far, it happens rarely enough that I continue using and just live with the occasional botched frame... but it's clear that one day that ratio will climb high enough that it just will no longer be worth it.

[pathdoc]

All this progressive failure of the PCB and increasing inability to find more is the reason the LX is not on my list of cameras to own. What would I use it for, anyway? The one feature that really sets it above all other Pentax film bodies is its legendary ability to do super-long-duration exposures, and I'm not interested in shooting those.

You'd think it would be eminently possible to resurrect the analogue TTL protocol and to produce a digital equivalent of off-the-plane metering - perhaps even in firmware - but sadly, no. And while 'no' remains the case, it is sad and weird to think that the LX and *istDS can do things the K-1 (mighty though it is) cannot. I will be sorry when my *istDS finally packs up, because I know that if it's the electronics which die, the circuit boards aren't available for that either. And when all the *istDS's, DS2's and D's are gone, and all the LX's and Super Programs are worn out... there goes TTL, forever.

[lithedreamer]

All this progressive failure of the PCB and increasing inability to find more is the reason the LX is not on my list of cameras to own. What would I use it for, anyway? The one feature that really sets it above all other Pentax film bodies is its legendary ability to do super-long-duration exposures, and I'm not interested in shooting those.

You'd think it would be eminently possible to resurrect the analogue TTL protocol and to produce a digital equivalent of off-the-plane metering - perhaps even in firmware - but sadly, no. And while 'no' remains the case, it is sad and weird to think that the LX and *istDS can do things the K-1 (mighty though it is) cannot. I will be sorry when my *istDS finally packs up, because I know that if it's the electronics which die, the circuit boards aren't available for that either. And when all the *istDS's, DS2's and D's are gone, and all the LX's and Super Programs are worn out... there goes TTL, forever.

...what's special about TTL?