Frits, I was also thinking of better films. Perhaps theirs were shot on a poor film for the event. I recently had a friend assist me with a wedding. He shot a Canon Rebel with Canon zoom (consumer grade), used one of my AF360FGZ flashes in Auto mode on it and used film that I provided him. I had all the processing done at my lab. The results are not significantly different than those shot with my MZ-S and primes. More difference in composition, DOF control, timing, etc. than anything. I really would be suprised if that combination was so superior to other makers offerings. Skill of photographer, choice of film and choice of lab can have a profound effect upon the results. Not wanting to bash the ZX-5n or 28-70/4, but I just can't seen them as being so clearly better. I suspect other factors.
Bruce Sunday, February 9, 2003, 5:07:01 AM, you wrote: FW> Could it be you used a better lab? FW> No intention to take down the 5n at all, or you, but I scanned a lot of my FW> stuff lately done with various (Pentax) camer's, including my PZ-1, and found FW> that what I got on the prints, was in a lot of cases very poor compared with FW> the results of the scan. So I think a better lab would have improved my FW> photographs immense. Comparing camera's/lenses based on results of the prints FW> from (different) labs is .. well ... not so straightforward, I would say. FW> Frits FW> On Sunday 09 February 2003 11:53, Heiko Hamann wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I just want to tell you of an experience of success that I had on >> Friday. We were invited to a wedding last summer and our friends did ask >> me, if I could make some photos. I didn't feel like doing it, so I only >> took my MZ-5n with the SMC-FA 28-70/4 and the AF500FTZ and shot 4 or 5 >> rolls of film with the camera set to complete auto modes. They had also >> asked some other friends and so we came together last Friday and had a >> look at 40 (!) films containing 36 pictures each. Really cruel... >> >> The experience of success was, that my pictures stick out regarding best >> sharpness, contrast and brilliance. The difference was significant! As I >> had used AF and matrix metering, this success cannot be attibuted to the >> photographer, but the camera system itself. The other pictures were >> taken with Canon SLRs (afair) which were equipped similar or even >> better. I wouldn't have thought that there might be any difference >> between SLRs of different manufacturers at all. But in this case I can >> clearly say: Pentax is superior! >> >> Cheers, Heiko
