So what then is the body of a PZ1 made of?
(It sure looks like plastic to me in its pictures, no?)
Also, the MZ/ZX bodies are not a light "plastic", but some kind of heavy
polycarbonate fusion material. Having owned older metal cameras, (such as
the tank-like 1970's Canon TX,) I believe an MZ/ZX would survive knocks, or
even a fall, with much more safety! IMO where metal severly jolts the
insides of a camera upon impact, the polycarbonate stuff would absorb better
the vibrations of this very same impact!
(I do not think one should assume that older and heavier metal bodies are
always better. It really depends upon the individual camera, and how well
it's put together...)
And as for durability, well, a ZX5n sure as hell ain't gonna' wear out in my
lifetime.
(My kids can buy their own damn cameras. Probably will too. Digital...)
And a PZ1 has a lot more little buttons and intricate features to it; which
means more stuff to have possible trouble with later on, yes?
The "bigger and heavier" part of the PZ1 interests me though; it might be
easier to hold onto and maneuver than a ZX?
Skip
> I am very concern about the quality rather than quantity. When I bought
the
> Z-1p, I compared the MZ-5n as well. IMHO, the built quality of MZ-5n is no
> match to the Z-1p. Not to mention that all MZ/ZX bodies were made of
plastic
> (even the mounts are metal). I reckon the Z-1 share the same chassis so I
> would prefer the Z-1. However, it is significantly bigger than the MZ-5n.
>
> regards,
> Alan Chan
-
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 .
