I have never seen Pentax advertising material claiming that the LX is weatherproof. I've heard quite the opposite because of the user-changeable prisms and screens.
What do you mean by 'prolonged exposure to rain'? Out on the deck all night? Shooting outside in medium rain for an hour? I've done the latter with the DS2. I've had my LX lock up in medium cold (by Canadian standards) -- we'll see how the DS2 does this winter. Why would it be that the electronic board for one camera will be available for a long time, but for another it will only be available for short time? As to LX repair frequency, it was a constant topic on my first stint on the PDML. What kind of repairs were the barrage of DL complaints about? -Aaron -----Original Message----- From: mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subj: Re: Re: Windoze versions and DS Date: Tue Jun 27, 2006 10:46 am Size: 3K To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > > From: Aaron Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2006/06/27 Tue PM 01:33:45 GMT > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Windoze versions and DS > > Mike, why on earth do you think a Pentax LX will withstand prolonged > exposure to rain? Because mine has. It's one of the selling points. > > We happen to know that the LX has more than one mechanical fault that > will appear over time due to design issues; we don't know anything like > that about the new bodies. Why would you make assumptions that the DL2 > is a less-durable body by an order of magnitude when we hear all the > time about LXes failing and hear rarely about DL2s failing? Because LXs are older. I've heard more about *istD's being returned for malfunctions that I care to. A very high proportion (IMO) of the users on this list did so. > > As far as I know, no one has broken off a D-series battery door. > However, many people have worn out the advance mechanisms on LXes. That particular fault is one that I don't remember hearing about at all. On the 67, yes. > Also, many people have had their mirrors get stuck to those rubber pads > that turn to goo with time and air exposure. To believe that the > battery door WILL eventually break and therefore vindicate you is kind > of silly. If the battery door turns out to be the sticky mirror of the D series, nobody will be happier than me. > > My ME Super, a consumer camera, was certainly more durable than my LX, > a professional camera (and I say that having had to replace one ME > Super because it wore out simply due to use). Mine died through moisture ingress killing the electronics. Cost of new component board £45. Cost of replacing new component board £60. Cost of new ME Super £90. I bought the board and fitted it myself. Bet you can still buy the part. Bet you won't be able to buy the equivalent for the DL2 in 2020. > > -Aaron > > On Jun 27, 2006, at 8:57 AM, mike wilson wrote: > > >> Why is that? What parts are surviving on your LX that are failing in > >> your DL2? > >> > >> As someone who has killed more than one camera simply through use, I > >> don't hold any illusions that the LX is indestructible. I was > >> surprised at how quickly transport mechanisms can wear out and need to > >> be repaired. > > > > I expect that something electronic will eventually fail in the DL2 and > > the parts will be either unavailable or cost more than a new camera. > > How long do sensors last, both in exposure numbers and straightforward > > time? Will the DL2 withstand prolonged exposure to rain? Most likely > > failure will be something to do with the card connections. After I've > > broken the battery door off a few times. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
