On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: > on 24.03.03 17:36, Chris Brogden at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > While we're on the subject... on what grounds do you base your claim that > > Pentax has better low-light AF capability? I've never noticed that > > before, so I checked the specs, and they're identical... the Pentax MZ-5n, > > Pentax MZ-6, Canon Rebel 2000, and the Canon Rebel Ti all have an > > autofocus EV range of 1-18 (at ISO 100). > > So you have wrong data. AF in MZ-5N and MZ-6 works from -1 EV without > any assist and it is much better than +1EV in EOS models you have > mentioned.
Thanks for the correction. Pentax Canada's site lists the wrong data. Their specifications for the 5n and 6 say "EV-1 ~ EV18", but if you ask for a comparison of the two (as I did), both come up as "EV1 ~ EV18". right info: http://www.pentaxcanada.com/products/slr/mz6.php http://www.pentaxcanada.com/products/slr/mz5n.php wrong info: http://www.pentaxcanada.com/products/slr/compare.php?compare%5B%5D=MZ-5N&compare%5B%5D=MZ-6&submitButtonName=Compare I'll email them and let them know. chris
