Raimo Korhonen wrote: > > Not likely. It is an unique camera with useful specs. > Nikon F 100 is not better, it is different.
So you don't find the following F100 features useful? - Extremely fast and accurate AF with all AF Nikkors - Even faster AF with AF-S Nikkors (similar to Canon USM) - 3D matrix metering with multiple segments - Support for VR (vibration reduction, similar to Canon IS) - 1/8000 sec fastest shutter speed - 1/250 sec fastest flash synch speed - Matrix balanced TTL auto flash - Built in 5 frames/sec motor drive - Extremely low shutter and mirror vibration - Very long life shutter, even with hard use I am sure there are many more I haven't thought of. Having used a Nikon F100 for my work, and having borrowed an MZ-S for a long trial, I can assure you that the F100 is a far, far better camera than the MZ-S, even when used hard and neglected, There's only one significant way in which the MZ-S is a better camera than the F100. That is, it has the ability to mount Pentax glass. And that's the only reason I'm considering buying one at today's vastly lower, but far more realistic UK price. It would replace my LX while it's being repaired (SMS), and supplement my outfit (LX, Super A [2], MX and ME Super) thereafter. Or do I use the money to buy a used Leica lens or two Voigtl�nder lenses? Decisions, decisions! Regards, John
