The cost of manufacturing a new MX would depend upon whether old dies are still usable or not. However, the current marketing people at Pentax would appear not to be interested in selling a camera that only sold a few thousand units a year. The major cost problem with the MX that I can see is it simply is it was not designed for robot assembly. Other than that, I can see no reason whey they should cost much more to make than they did back in the 70-80's, given cheap third world labor . They were killed more by the economic climate in the early 80's then by anything else. Also, Pentax considered the LX the replacement for the MX, and I doubt production continued past the LX's introduction, though the MX continued to be sold for a couple of more years (probably from stock on hand).
Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I also tried to imagine what a new MX (all metal mechanical) would cost > nowadays. Probably about the same as the MZ-S, especially if they used > a Mg alloy shell. It's really easy to second guess Pentax, but I just > don';t know enough about the reality of their situation to make > realistic criticism. > > Any idiot can buy a Canon or a Nikon, but it take's a special kind of > idiot to buy a Pentax!
