My dilemma is this:
- should I stay with Pentax, or go with Nikon (I'm leaning towards a used F4)
If I remember correctly, F4 was said to be the greatest manual focus camera ever. Yes, you read it correctly, I said manual focus. The first Nikon with good AF was F90 if I am not mistaken, and F90X which was a hugely successful model, then the F5 & F100. The F801s which I had, had inferior AF to the Z-1p, and I would expect the same for previous models. My friend's F90X has slightly better AF than my Z-1p, but for some reason it also produces very annoying noise during AF.
- If I stay with Pentax, should I go with PZ1P or MZ-S?
The single AF sensor is a serious limiting factor for any moving subjects imho.
I've read various reports here on the list of Pentax slowly pulling faster pro grade lenses. This has me concerned, as I will need those lenses later (e.g., 85/1.4 to replace my current MF 85/1.4, 24/2 to replace 24/2.8 I am using now, etc.).
I think nobody really knows here. The way I see it, Pentax is either retreating from 135, or on its way to produce USM like lenses. To replace FA/FA* lenses with another set of non-USM lenses doesn't make sense.
The PZ1P and F4 go for comparable prices (albeit not comparable condition) on KEH, which I have been using as a quasi-benchmark for my price checks. No matter where I go, I will end up buying new lenses in AF to replace my current MF lineup.
Why bother Pentax or Nikon then? Why not go Canon to enjoy full USM & IS capability? You would be fooling yourself to believe Z-1p or MZ-S offer the same AF ability as high end Canon. Being able to use IS without tripod is a big plus as well.
Regards, Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
_________________________________________________________________
Free yourself from those irritating pop-up ads with MSn Premium. Get 2months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
