The fortnightly competition was put up by an individual member and he set the rules for that.

Those rules do not apply to anything else. In other words, they are not global to the forum.

"The range" was quite small in those days, so to answer your question it would be top of the range.

However, as top of the range means thousands of pounds in terms of the most expensive Canon and Nikon cameras, it's not really a very fair comparison.

If translated cost wise into modern cameras, I would guesss the MX might cost about £2000. But this isn't fair either, because camera manufacturing methods have changed and costs have fallen dramatically. The conventional manufacturing techniques of the MX (although in itself it contains lots of engineering plastic which was new) would mean it was more like Leica prices if done in the same way today.

All of this is true, but it is a good idea to talk to the seller first.

We shouldn't assume that it was deliberate until we have at least communicated our dissatisfaction.

Give the seller a chance to put it right.

You can't compare it with the DSLRs really, they are entirely different beasts. The lowest cost DSLR has more features and better performance in terms of accuracy of shutter speeds and the like than any camera of the MX period.

The MX is a modern equivalent of the Spotmatic. Its features are the same, but it has a better meter using GPD cells, a new compact shutter, a bigger and brighter viewfinder...

If you wanted to place it, then considering its vast range of specialist accessories and its build quality, it competes with the Nikon FM2 and similar manual cameras.

One book I have describes it as the "Little Professional" and of course the LX becomes the "Big professional".

I think the MX is the pinnacle of development of the Spotmatic.

The K10D is a great camera, but the K20D is significantly better.

When we upgraded we sold one of our K10D cameras for £333 on eBay, so the actual cost of one of the K20Ds was only abot £100

You did the same thing last time Mike-P, so why not do it again now?

I've owned and used both these lenses and the FAJ lens, although having a character all of its own, is not a patch on the 55-300mm.

If you don't need 35mm film coverage, go for the DA lens. No contest.

You have your chance to express your feelings in the feedback section when you enter a rating under P&P Charges.

Before you do, bear in mind that the seller may have made a mistake and may not have connected the price in the auction with what it cost at the Post Office (along with all the other packages they had) and that sometimes when we get to the PO the method quoted for turns out to be a worse choice than an alternative. So contact the seller first and see what they say.

I weigh items at home, allow a little extra for packaging, and have written out a table of costs based on the new eBay Reckoner. It is within the rules to add a small handling charge for packaging, labels, fuel, time, etc., and I have set my charge at 50p. Doing this I am usually very close to the actual cost, sometimes out of pocket but rarely more than £1 in my favour. I monitor the amount charged and the actual cost and any major error is refunded, before the buyer asks if possible.

I'm very lucky that one of the girls at ADAPS brings me boxes every week, and I have access to masses of boxes that would otherwise be thrown away. That I think is meaningful recycling.

I just wait for you to start typing and then hit the Add Comment button...

I did try out a Tamron recently and it was very good. The only thing I didn't like was its bulk and the clumsy way it worked. Can't quite remember what it was about it but it didn't operate in the same smooth way that the Pentax lenses do. But it was very similar in performance to the SMC Pentax-FAJ 75-300mm.

The MX takes two G13 (10L14) silver oxide cells. The alternative is the alkaline cell the same size, but the battery life is halved. Lithium batteries should not be used, possibly because of the voltage being too high or possibly because of heat generation.

Slides are the best way to learn how your photography technique is going, because what you take is what you get, with no automatic printing machines distorting it on the way. To view them on a PC they need to be scanned. A film scanner will give the best results for serious large scale printing, but many flat bed scanners will have the facility to scan film also.