Roland wrote:
> * Nicolas Lau wrote:
>
> >First, its Too high price
>
> Yes, if you see the MZ-S as a replacement model for the Z-1p - which it is not.
> No, if you see the MZ-S as an autofocus replacement model for the LX - which it
>seems to be.
In my opinion the MZ-S cannot be too expensive. I'm very happy that it cost as much as
it does. I would be even more happy if it costed, say, $500 more. Does it sound
crazy? Maybe.
Let me explain: theres no denying that the quality of Pentax equipment have
detorierated quickly during the 90's. I based this on my experience with my equipment
not some kind of urban myth or claims from people living in the past. None of my K and
A lenses ever saw a repair shop while every single of my FA* pro lenses have been
repaired or should have. In addition, my FA645 75/2.8 has jammed AF (I don't bother
getting it fixed; don't use AF with that lens). Likewise, I'm certain that the film
transport of the MZ-series won't last as long as on eg. an ME. The Z-1p is open to the
elements and have cheap plastic outer body. I know its a well built camera but its
obvious that someone cut corners. Also Pentax current pro lenses (FA*) are only
painted and are incredibly prone to wear and scratches.
So the fact that the MZ-S is expensive tells me that they might gone for decent, or
even damned good, built quality this time. So far the reports indicate that this is
indeed the case. There more expensive it is the more happy I am. Also, the Limited
lenses seems to be step in the same direction. They have an incredibly strong and
durable outer finish that wears very well. I hope Pentax continue this trend; they
should redesign the FA* lenses and get rid of the painted plastic and hopeless focus
scale windows.
Pål
-
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 .
