===================================
www.fotopolis.pl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===================================
internetowy magazyn o fotografii
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Haller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "PDML" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 8:54 AM
Subject: MX vs LX or MZ-3 vs. MZ-S or ? (Long Boring Ramble!)
> Hello Folks,
>
> I am an enthusist photographer, not a professional, but I take a lot of
> pictures. Landscapes, autos, and lots of close up to macro stuff, like
> flowers, knives, and bits of machinery.
>
> I prefer inanimate objects, but have taken good pictures of people if
> they forget I'm there and I can take many shots of them. If I "love"
> the subject (again usually inanimate objects) I often get what I
> consider awesome photos.
>
> I "never" use flash (okay maybe a little fill-in if I absolutely _have_
> to, but it makes me feel like I've failed somehow). I usually use ASA
> 400-3200 unless I'm shooting for detail where I'm "forced" to use ASA
> 25-100. I like low light, night and early morning.
>
> I like small compact cameras. I could never get used to a F3HP, it was
> just too big and clunky!
>
> I typically use a metered "manual" mode even if AE or SE or a program
> exposure mode is available, but I'd use AE if I needed to. I want to
> compose and set exposure with the lens wide open, then have it close
> down when I shoot.
>
> I prefer the, oh I don't know what to call it, the drama or focus of
> B&W photography and I "see in B&W" but I have a really good color sense
> (like matching colors, using complimentary colors - I even taught
> ceramic underglazing) so if I take my time I've made good color
> pictures, but usually of slower moving subjects like flowers ;-).
>
> Once I bought a Epson Color 800 and now my new Epson 2200, I've taken
> to having my B&W negs or color slides scanned (PhotoCD and a friend's
> Nikon CoolScan). Then I use Photoshop and make my own prints. I'm in
> the market for my own film/slide scanner.
>
> I started with my Dad's Leica IIIg with a 50mm Summicron (if I remember
> correctly) , which took "magical" pictures where the subject somehow
> stood apart from the rest of the picture. I remember a remarkable roll
> of casual shots I made of my little brother in his sandbox that came
> out like I was a pro at LIFE magazine.
>
> But when I was old enough to realize what I was holding, I got scared
> and bought a Konica Auto S2 rangefinder, with which I created some my
> best pictures, albeit after hours of cropping and exposure experiments
> in the darkroom. (I will still take it out for barbecues or other
> occasions where I don't want to bother with the SLRs.)
>
> Then I was convinced to buy an SLR to use different lenses, and found a
> whole world of close-up pictures, wide angle and telephoto. My tool was
> a Minolta SRT-101 with a few MD lenses. I bought the body and the 50mm
> lens and my Dad bought a 28mm and a 100mm, When I left home, I left the
> Minolta behind.
>
> When I could afford another SLR, I found the Pentax MX (with 50mm 1.4 M
> lens) and felt like I had found the "perfect" camera. Bright viewfinder
> with good coverage, unobtrusive LED metering and shutter speed
> indicators and even the aperture showed with that little prism window.
> DOF, mechanical shutter, that 1.4 lens, oh gosh I could go on and on,
> as I'm sure most of you can imagine. :-) Soon came more lenses,
> filters, macro, shades, a couple more MX bodies, winders and so forth.
>
> I even played with an LX for a while, loaned to me, and I really
> appreciated the more sensitive meter, and of course the quality of the
> body, but I actually preferred the viewfinder of the MX. (I could not
> afford an LX then, anyway!)
>
> Now I seem to be at a crossroad, one you have probably travelled past
> already, and I am hoping you can help me choose a path. As much as I
> love my old Pentax equipment, it all seems to be getting awfully old,
> and I keep having to send bodies out more often for repair and
> adjustment, breaking those winder battery door screws, and even my baby
> 1.4M doesn't mount like it used to.
>
> One response (as it seems to me) is to buy more MX bodies and Pentax
> SMC-M lenses, in the best condition I can find, and just keep going the
> way I have been.
>
> Another way to go seems to be to "move up" to a used LX body, as the MX
> bodies are what is getting the most expensive and troublesome to
> maintain, and keep collecting SMC-M or -A lenses.
>
> But I can imagine circumstances when AF would extend my domain, for
> pictures of fast moving objects that are difficult to keep in focus
> manually. (Can you say Laguna Seca?) And I've made plenty of "metering
> mistakes" that might have been prevented by the newer matrix metering
> systems.
>
> So, another way to go seems to be to step up to the plate and buy
> either an MZ-3 (black) or an MZ-S, then start buying FA lenses. From
> what I've read online there are some _fine_ FA lenses. I'm thinking the
> 35mm FA f/2, 50mm FA f/2.8 Macro, 100mm FA f/2.8 Macro and 200mm FA
> f/2.8 would make a good shopping list. But which body? Is the added
> expense of the MZ-S worth it compared to the MZ-3? Remember I'm a
> simple man, and not all that concerned with "Hyper" modes and so forth,
> I'm just looking for a modern replacement for my MXs.
>
> But do you think I'll be able to live with the newer bodies? I _read_
> that the viewfinders are no-where-near as bright as the old MX/LX and
> if I found the LX finder a bit busy, I can imagine what I'll think of
> the MZs. I live in sleepy Santa Cruz CA, so please don't advise me to
> head down to my "local" camera shop and look at both of the MZ cameras,
> there ain't no such thing. I haven't seen an MZ-S even in the "big"
> camera shops in San Jose, and of course we don't get the MZ-3 here in
> the United States. I did see an MZ-5n on the shelf, but they were "too
> busy" to let me play with it. >8-[
>
> And then there's the D word! :-) It seems a bit early to me, but my
> older brother has been using a C*n*n D60 and now a D10 with a bunch of
> C*n*n lenses and swears by them. And since I'm scanning my film and
> printing to an inkjet out of Photoshop, I certainly can't get on a high
> horse about film resolution and so forth can I? Is this really the
> answer? Move to digital rather than spend more monry on film based
> bodies?
>
> So what do _you_ think?
>
> [ ] Keep buying used MXs ?
>
> [ ] Buy a used LX?
>
> Or do I move on to an AF body? And if I go AF, which MZ?
>
> [ ] An MZ-3 (black)?
>
> [ ] An MZ-S?
>
> Or,
>
> [ ] Move to digital (either now, C*n*n with RAW output, or wait for
> the mythical Pentax D)?
>
> Sorry for the rambling tale, but I thought the background might help.
> Thanks for listening!
>
> - THaller
>
