On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The MX is lighter than the KX. Both have real similar features but you can change >out the screens on the MX. KX has a higher ISO range.
Does the KX have a split screen? > Were it me, I have to say I'd wait and spend a little more for the LX. It's a nearly >perfect camera. No interest in it, at all. If I were spending that much, I'd buy an MZ-S probably. Or med format camera. I think what holds my interest is a cheap body with MLU and one that doesn't have a serious reliance on battery power. I'd like to do some astrophotography someday. As I said, failing that, I'll get a ZX-M. -- http://www.infotainment.org "The destructive character is cheerful." - Walter Benjamin - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
