[LesDMess]

I lusted one in my film days. At that time I shot a Nikon F2a and I still had LX envy.
It is a fantastic beast with great features. In the time it was new it was a great choice. Now that it has age on it, most digital cameras offer features that make some of the unique bits of the LX less important and the lack of easy access to repair parts for complex electronic parts and other unique items makes it harder to justify over a much simpler to maintain and use MX. That doesn't detract from the LX - if it is a working copy it is both beautiful and special. But it does remove some temptation to buy given the high price for acquisition and maintenance uncertainties.

Of the pro manual cameras with aperture priority mode, only the LX's continous to be unmatched even by digital.



Interestingly, all modern cameras with a shutter and mirror lockup mode has a warning not to lock it up and point the lens towards the sun for any extended time as it will damage the shutter. But not with these SLRs as they all have titanium shutters. I wonder if this limitation applies to mirrorless digitals? I'll have to check my manual if it states anything about it.

[lotech]

A two-stop difference in brightness? That's an exaggeration.
If you do go for an MX suggest you keep the KX as well.
IMO in many important respects the KX is a better camera.

Chris

If you have both side by side you can surely tell the difference. For instance, I can barely focus with the Pentacon 30mm/f3.5 wide open in dim indoor lightings such as restaurant, where it is much much easier with the Super A, and the screen color is neutral instead of slightly warm to the eyes on the KX, I know wide angle lens was one of the reasons to that. I know the KX is a more well made camera, my one got sticky shutter release it won't return some times, I open up the bottom plate and fixed it with some lub. My one also has a non functioning, or very hard to use self timer and MLU, both are not important to me than the viewfinder brightness. I believe all Ks uses the same type of screen, where Ms and Super A are the other type on par with modern DSLR. I used to focus with the matte area, sometimes too dark even micro prism will turn black made it useless, with matte screen I at least can tell it is near in focus.

[Digitalis]

Interestingly, all modern cameras with a shutter and mirror lockup mode has a warning not to lock it up and point the lens towards the sun for any extended time as it will damage the shutter. But not with these SLRs as they all have titanium shutters. I wonder if this limitation applies to mirrorless digitals? I'll have to check my manual if it states anything about it.

No, this warning is still worth heeding as even titanium can burn*. Rubberized cloth shutters were very easy to burn through when exposed to focused light. Metal shutters are more durable and have longer lives than older designs but they aren't invulnerable.


*and when it does, no ordinary fire extinguisher can put it out.

[lotech]

No, this warning is still worth heeding as even titanium can burn*. Rubberized cloth shutters were very easy to burn through when exposed to focused light. Metal shutters are more durable and have longer lives than older designs but they aren't invulnerable.


*and when it does, no ordinary fire extinguisher can put it out.

I read more than once that do not leave the rangefinder camera under the sun, as it does not have mirror to protect the shutter curtain, the same also true to mirrorless digital cameras. Just a side track here, I was stupid enough to shoot an unexpected near full solar eclipse unplanned, without a ND filter, I shoot straight at the sun with my K3, thanks God the sensor did not burn and I got usable photos, of course I will not do that again ha !

[LesDMess]

No, this warning is still worth heeding as even titanium can burn*. Rubberized cloth shutters were very easy to burn through when exposed to focused light. Metal shutters are more durable and have longer lives than older designs but they aren't invulnerable.


*and when it does, no ordinary fire extinguisher can put it out.

I'm not a metallurgist, but a quick search for Ti reaction temperatures would lead me to the same conclusion Nikon engineers did in the development of F series cameras. After they released the F with MLU, they found the cloth shutter can burn so they changed it to Ti - which was not a small undertaking at that time. Definitely not achieving combustion via the ol' magnifying glass routine.

[andrewd]

Really the best time to acquire an autofocus camera if you want one. I picked up a Canon EOS-1VHS on local CL from a forensics lab looking practically unused for $50!



This was half the price I paid for my second LX - sans viewfinder, on auction site listed as "from old relative don't know if it works as-is". Fortunately that LX is still 100% functional over 10 years now! I have since gotten rid of all my EOS gear.

The EOS1V is awesome, but no way is $50 the market price now!! More like $600 to $900. You have to be extremely lucky to find someone who is too lazy to check recently completed ebay listings to give it away for $50.

I think the peak time for film camera bargains was about 10 years ago.

[Eyewanders]

The EOS1V is awesome, but no way is $50 the market price now!! More like $600 to $900. You have to be extremely lucky to find someone who is too lazy to check recently completed ebay listings to give it away for $50.

I think the peak time for film camera bargains was about 10 years ago.

Earlier than that even. I'd say between 2005 and 2010 was the magic hour.
In 2008 someone just gave to me a perfectly working K1000 as a "bonus" for buying two Pentax M series lenses from him (which were also cheap then).
I didn't start buying film gear again until around 2012, and even between then and 2014 (when I bought quite a bit more) prices were steadily and surely going up.
Then they really started going up around 2016-2017... and by 2020 it was a hockey-stick of growth to now.

[martin42mm]

As I have said in other posts, the only issue I have had with the MX is if/when the blind cords ( note-not tapes) fall off the pulleys that guide them at the top and bottom of the blind drums. Providing you do not get a cord failure, or relieve the tension on a full-working blind, you will not encounter this issue. If you do, it can be repaired, but involves a major strip-down, and it is very fiddly to get the cord back on the pulley. But it can be done, and as it is an uncommon problem you will probably never encounter the issue. But if you are tempted to buy an MX with a less-than-vertical edge to either blind, walk away-it is a sure indication that one cord has dropped off a pulley.

As for LX or MX, I concur the LX is more likely to be the less reliable, mainly because they have often been used heavily by professionals, and they are the more complicated design, so more to go wrong and more difficult to repair.

[lotech]

As I have said in other posts, the only issue I have had with the MX is if/when the blind cords ( note-not tapes) fall off the pulleys that guide them at the top and bottom of the blind drums. Providing you do not get a cord failure, or relieve the tension on a full-working blind, you will not encounter this issue. If you do, it can be repaired, but involves a major strip-down, and it is very fiddly to get the cord back on the pulley. But it can be done, and as it is an uncommon problem you will probably never encounter the issue. But if you are tempted to buy an MX with a less-than-vertical edge to either blind, walk away-it is a sure indication that one cord has dropped off a pulley.

As for LX or MX, I concur the LX is more likely to be the less reliable, mainly because they have often been used heavily by professionals, and they are the more complicated design, so more to go wrong and more difficult to repair.

I did not go into that depth in repairing, the most problem I had with the curtain was Russian rangefinders, that's why I wanted the K2, the only vantage Pentax with a Copal shutter. So far all my old Japanese film cameras with cloth curtain are working fine, so that I still want the MX.

[estost]

Sorry, folks, but I have to step in in defense of the LX I bought a first generation one second hand towards the end of the eighties and (ab)used it for years as a photojournalist. I still have it and it still works like a charm. No sticky mirror, no repairs whatsoever, no problems, no servicing... It is just such a wonderfully versatile tool: The ultralong autoexposure, those superfast times on the other end, the mirror lockup. Pull off the viewfinder and put in on the ground or use it over head. The unbeatable TTL flash system and the super exact film advance which works backwards as well. And it is stable, rugged, rain- and dust-proof.

The MX on the other hand... Don't get me wrong, it is a great tiny thing and it was actually my very first camera. Had several of them later before I got the LX. Here are the problems I encountered (not now but 35 years ago): The flimsy film advance lever which could even malfunction. Slipping, prolonged exposure times due to problems with the spring loaded mechanics. The self-exposure lever just dying. Not to speak of the crappy motor drive with all those cast aluminium parts breaking... I ended up giving away the MX bodies to my girlfriends: Small hands and super gentle treatment. They loved it.

[Eyewanders]

Thought I'd let everyone know (though I know this has been hinted at now and again but I'm not sure I've seen it stated in no uncertain terms)...

I got word back from the illustrious E. Hendrickson that he will not work on LX cameras any longer.
I asked very specifically if he'd be willing to do a basic CLA for a known-working late model that had no symptoms of needed repair of any sort. He said he would not.

So there's that.

And now I have to decide what to do with the very late model that is in quite wonderful shape but is in clear need of refoaming in the mirrorbox... as well as having an FA-1 that seems to not fit as snugly as I'd like (Anyone else experience some play in their prism whilst mounted??? my old one has the slightest bit, but not enough that I'd have ever taken note of it, while this new one does).
At any rate - suggestions welcome.... not sure what I'll do. The LX at the price iI laid out for this one isn't a camera I feel comfortable entering myself to be very frank.

[lotech]

I only handled handful of Pentax film cameras, P30, KX and Super A, they all worked fine, except that the winder for Super A is very noisy and not ergonomic, well all winders of that era were made in similar way and not pretty like the FM2 one that I've got. I don't want any winder for the film camera anymore, and there are only 36 frames to burn what for ? but a small grip is good to have, luckily Super A got one, if not enough a 'thumb up' bracket will help to get a good grip.

[LesDMess]

Thought I'd let everyone know (though I know this has been hinted at now and again but I'm not sure I've seen it stated in no uncertain terms)...

I got word back from the illustrious E. Hendrickson that he will not work on LX cameras any longer.
I asked very specifically if he'd be willing to do a basic CLA for a known-working late model that had no symptoms of needed repair of any sort. He said he would not.

So there's that.

And now I have to decide what to do with the very late model that is in quite wonderful shape but is in clear need of refoaming in the mirrorbox... as well as having an FA-1 that seems to not fit as snugly as I'd like (Anyone else experience some play in their prism whilst mounted??? my old one has the slightest bit, but not enough that I'd have ever taken note of it, while this new one does).
At any rate - suggestions welcome.... not sure what I'll do. The LX at the price iI laid out for this one isn't a camera I feel comfortable entering myself to be very frank.

Means an opportunity to explore in retirement . . .

I bought my first LX from KEH rated EX and it supposedly meant it got a CLA. They do buy a lot of old film cameras - LXs too, and looking at their site they do list repairs so I wonder if they would CLA an LX?

My second LX bought off auction with no finder and film back listed "as-is not working" as I was going to tinker with it but it continous to work perfectly over ten years now. Looks like I will have to find another to tinker with.

---------- Post added 05-31-22 at 10:45 PM ----------

I only handled handful of Pentax film cameras, P30, KX and Super A, they all worked fine, except that the winder for Super A is very noisy and not ergonomic, well all winders of that era were made in similar way and not pretty like the FM2 one that I've got. I don't want any winder for the film camera anymore, and there are only 36 frames to burn what for ? but a small grip is good to have, luckily Super A got one, if not enough a 'thumb up' bracket will help to get a good grip.

Who doesn't like a motor/winder . . .



The Canon 1VHS sounds like a machine gun at 10fps and yes the roll is gone just like that. That's why I need a 250 film back . . .

Just noticed, I need to add the MX with motor on this.

[Eyewanders]

Sorry, folks, but I have to step in in defense of the LX I bought a first generation one second hand towards the end of the eighties and (ab)used it for years as a photojournalist. I still have it and it still works like a charm. No sticky mirror, no repairs whatsoever, no problems, no servicing... It is just such a wonderfully versatile tool: The ultralong autoexposure, those superfast times on the other end, the mirror lockup. Pull off the viewfinder and put in on the ground or use it over head. The unbeatable TTL flash system and the super exact film advance which works backwards as well. And it is stable, rugged, rain- and dust-proof.

The MX on the other hand... Don't get me wrong, it is a great tiny thing and it was actually my very first camera. Had several of them later before I got the LX. Here are the problems I encountered (not now but 35 years ago): The flimsy film advance lever which could even malfunction. Slipping, prolonged exposure times due to problems with the spring loaded mechanics. The self-exposure lever just dying. Not to speak of the crappy motor drive with all those cast aluminium parts breaking... I ended up giving away the MX bodies to my girlfriends: Small hands and super gentle treatment. They loved it.

Good testimonial and I don't doubt it. Do you (and have you) still use it at that level of use/abuse in the past 10 years or anywhere approaching it?

[estost]

Good testimonial and I don't doubt it. Do you (and have you) still use it at that level of use/abuse in the past 10 years or anywhere approaching it?

Not quite. The LX retired in 2005 when I went digital with the istD. Ever since it has been lying in darkness stuffed away in some old photobag. I used it for some occasional analogue shooting but I soon preferred my MZ-S since it is similar to the digitals and makes use of modern lenses. The LX thus had plenty of time to at least develop some sticky mirror or glutinous grease, but never did. I recently gave it to my daughter who loves to play around with film. The camera is doing fine, no problem whatsoever, only the battery is slightly week after 20 years. I don't see any reason though why I should not toss it into my motorbike and go to Ukraine, but I will probably rather take the K-1

On the other hand, acclaimed veteran photojournalist Günter Zint shot years of West German anti nuclear power protests (Gorleben, Brokdorf) with his MX, enduring truncheons, water cannons and tear gas.