Agree. The only problem with the MZ-S is that it came 10 yeras to late. It would have been a huge success if they made it at the same time as the PZ-1p. The good thing about it is that it came so late: Now it's posible to get a almost new one :-) And for me it was hard to get used to the "missing" aperture wheel on the body and the kinda tricky mode changing. Perhaps I didn't use it long enough (9 months).
Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Thibouille [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 24. januar 2005 07:20 Til: [email protected] Emne: Re: MZ-S: what is a good price ? I should have been more clear, in my mind, "best film body" is more like "most advanced body": if you consider AF 35mm bodies (because that's what I'm considering, I do not hesitate btween LX and Ist-Ds, the point is not there) id not see any other competition to the MZ-s than the Z1 / Z1-p. The thing is I have already a Z1. ---------------- Thibouille On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 16:39:02 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I'm a new owner of the MZ-S, so I haven't got any final impressions > > yet, but I'd initially rank the PZ-1p and MZ-S at the top of the list. > > ...the PZ-1p is best for flash compensation, high top shutter speed > > (1/8000), and fast winding speed (3.5fps), plus it is comfortable if > > somewhat BIG. > > ...the PZ-1 is best for transparencies with a slower winding speed > > (1.5fps?) > > > Relying on the printed specs instead of my own measurements ('cause I haven't > made any such measurements) the PZ-1p is supposed to wind at 4 fps and the PZ- > 1 at 3 fps, which I think still makes it one of the faster speeds Pentax ever > put into a camera body's built-in motor. Thus, both are faster than the MZ-S, > as well as having faster shutters. > > > > and the same top shutter speed, plus it has some > > extraordinary interval timing capabilities hidden away under the PF > > functions. Also comfortable and still BIG, > > ...The MZ-S is much smaller and lighter. It is much more like the > > standard Pentax 35mm camera offering with only minor compromises on > > shutter speed (1/6000), and winder speed (2.5fps?). The other > > features seem very comparable to the PZ-1p. I'd put it in the same > > class as the LX in terms of fit and finish, and size and weight. > > When the MZ-S came out -- and when I was able to check one out in the store > (there was a significant interval between these) I concluded, based on > comparing specs and then on comparing the cameras, that for me the MZ-s could > not replace the PZ-1. I thought at the time that the only way I'd ever go for > an MZ-s was if something happpened to my ZX-5n (I wouldn't want to give up > the -5n; I just like it; but the -S could *replace* it if need be, I > thought). However, things have changed: The -5n is now out of commission, but > I am unlikely to replace it (or repair it) because I now have an *istD; I > just don't need something in the niche formerly occupied by my ZX-5n. > > But I do agree with the point, made elsewhere in the thread, that there > probably is not *a* definite "best film body" made by Pentax. That's one > reason I disagreed with the statement that the MZ-S was the "best film body" - > - because I don't think it can be claimed that the MZ-S is a better body than > the PZ-1, the PZ-1p, the LX, the 645N (and probably some others with which > I'm not familiar) ... For me, as noted above, I felt that it was NOT a better > body than the PZ-1. I would agree with putting it in a group of "the best > bodies", but I don't think it stands out by itself. > > ERNR > > -- ------------------------ Thibouille
