Hi Roland,
I'm glad Pentax has taken the path they have, even if their speed on that
path is a little slower than ideal.
Although I've never held a Minolta body, I have held a few Canons. The
Rebels struck me as being almost disposable in quality, if not in price. My
ZX-5n feels a little more solid to me, but, truthfully, I'd prefer to have
something even more so, could I afford it. The midlevel EOS cameras felt
ugly, bulky, and misproportioned in my hands (my hands are large)--I
certainly don't want to own or use one.
Sometimes I do envy Canon users, but only for one thing--the number of PC
lenses they have available. Fortunately, I can live with that level of envy.
Dan Scott
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>After following the latest threads with complaints about the features in
>various Pentax SLR's (MZ-S, MZ-7 etc.) it's clear to me that the
>majority of users wants features, features and nothing but features.
>
>Performance and build quality is of 2nd concern.
>
>This is of course very bad for Pentax since they have, in contradiction
>to Canon and Minolta, choosen the blessed pathway of good build quality
>and high performance.
>
>All, but the most expensive cameras, are a compromise between build
>quality, performance, features - and price. This is because everything
>cost money and a maker has to decide very carefully about what to
>concentrate on without raising the price.
>
>Take for example the MZ-7 vs Canon EOS 300 and Minolta 505Si. Now, tests
>in Practical Photography (uk), and in other magazines, has clearly
>showned that Pentax is the winner when it comes to performance and build
>quality, while the Canon and Minolta wins the feature race.
>Nikon is a strange mix between advanced features and strange omissions
>(like the abscense of remote controlled shutter release).
>
>The Pentax MZ-7 has both the fastest AF and the fastest winder in it's
>class. It has metal reinforcements where the competition uses plastic
>instead.
>Of course Pentax could have put in spot meter and auto bracketing in the
>MZ-7, but in order to avoid a price raise - they would be forced to slow
>down the autofocus by using a simpler and less expensive AF motor, they
>would also be forced to remove some of the expensive metal and replace
>it with cheap plastic.
>
>And hey, welcome the new Pentax 300 (or is it Pentax 505Si?).
>
>Same story with the MZ-S.
>Minolta Dynax 7 is a feature filled camera - but it lacks the
>smoothness, the build quality and the exact performance of the MZ-S.
>Hyundai or Mercedes? It's an easy choice for me...
>
>If the Dynax 7 had the build quality of the MZ-S, it would be much more
>expensive than the MZ-S.
>Compare the Dynax 7 to the Dynax 9 and discover that the Dynax 7 wins
>the feature race, but the Dynax 9 has much better build quality (and a
>much higher price tag).
>
>Pentax is all about quality and performance. If one believes that
>features is of more importance, then choose Canon or Minolta instead. If
>you care about quality and performance, then go Pentax.
>
>Best regards,
>--
>Roland Mabo
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.algonet.se/~rolamo
>
>
>
>-
>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 .
-
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 .
