Some thoughts on this rather stupid thread below.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pentax Clover" <
Subject: Re: MZ-S and More ?
> I am OK that the MZ-S is the cheapest all metal, solid AF body
out there if
> you except the N90s/ F90x. But I am asking myself what is
more important
> for a picture, and I do not think that Metal body change a lot
if others
> features are missing, it will be as I buy a beautifull but
empty box
It is also the smallest one out there. The Nikons and Canons are
oversized bloated pigs of cameras. If you want a camera that big
and heavy, why buy one with an inadequate format size. I would
rather have a 645 format if the camera is as big as a 645. There
is an important feature you are completely forgetting in the big
Nikons.
Big camera, small negative. Big failure.
As we are seeing now, all metal cameras last longer. The
Spotmatics are getting close to 40 years old, and still going
strong. That is a very important feature, unless you consider a
camera to be disposable, like a paper napkin. For myself, I am
still using 20 year old metal bodied cameras as my front line
equipment. It has been a reassuring relationship, knowing that I
don't have to relearn a camera every 5 years as the plastic
wears out.
I am sure Pentax could have put a 1/12000 second top speed into
it, with a 1/8000 second flash sync, and a 5 frame per second
drive rate. I am also sure it would have made the camera closer
to the 6x7 in dimensions and weight, sort of like the F100 is.
That has never been the Pentax way. Historically, compact sizing
has always been one of the first design parameters for Pentax,
even at the expense of some "features" that may or may not be
useful.
Camera design is all about compromise. I use Pentax because I
like the compromises they make better then the compromises their
competition makes.
The thing I am least willing to compromise on is lens quality.
If I used Nikon or Canon or Minolta, I would have to compromise
in that area, and my pictures would suffer for it, much more
than losing a frame per second in drive speed, or a 1/3 stop of
flash sync.
Unfortunately, I had to compromise somewhat. I couldn't afford
Leica. So I went with what I considered the next best thing.
One of the first things my mentor taught me was that any
compromise in the "feature set" (this was back in the days when
1/2000 second top speed and 1/80 second flash sync was a
"feature") could be worked around by applied intelligence. If
the lens quality wasn't there, it didn't matter how you
approached the subject.
William Robb
Remember, the LX Gallery is coming up.
Please see:
http://pug.komkon.org/LX_Gallery/LX_Submit.html
for more information.
Submission deadline is June 30, 2001
-
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 .
