Lewis wrote: > Why did you like the others and not the Z-1p? Like those you mentioned, it > did what it was suopposed to do, and considering flexibility, often did it > better.
I didn't like the looks, the plasticky feel and the interface with too many features buried in menues to scroll through to reach. It certainly was a great value for mony in terms of feature. I'll rather have a simpler, more solid camera if I have the choice. BTW I do think that the Z-1p was Pentax largest tactical mistake. It was dumbed down into oblivion in the market place and consequently sold "cheap". Let me explain. The camera was originally intended as an EOS-1 competitor. That camera was the benchmark. It was actually an LX replacement by being their professional offering. The LX was the first weather sealed SLR. The Z-1p was also by design weather sealed something that explains its interface with as few buttons as possible making it easier to seal. Incidentally, it also uses the same shutter unit as the Nikon F90 (F100?). Whats more, the FA* lenses were originally designed splash-proof like the camera. This is why lenses like the FA* 24/2 and FA* 85/1.4 was designed with inner focusing. This made it easier to seal the lenses because the tubes don't move while focusing. I do believe but I'm not sure, that Pentax had removed the aperture ring for sealing reasons. One can only wonder what features they removed from the camera but obviously it used a more stury body covering; either metal or polycarbonate of the same variety as they use on the 645's. Pentax marketing people actually chickened out. They were afraid of reclamation by people drowning the equipment. It was splash-proof but not water proof. In this way Pentax lost the opportunity to market a professional or semi-pro body at a vital point in time with a novel feature; weather sealing ten years before Canon. The lost the opportunity of having a body that gave status and pride of ownership. Instead they stripped it down as much as they thought possible. Thats why it is so strange; a solid steel chassis with a dirt cheap outer body that cracks in certain places. The curios Z-5, almost a Z-1p, probably made more sense with the original Z-1p far more upmarket. The Z-5 was shelved but later excavated and sold only for the japanese market. Whats more. They developed a successor internally labeled "Z-2". They dropped that ball too. Instead somebody presumably from marketing, got the idea that they should use the cost setting that one in production to rather subsidise the existing model. They were probably thinking that if we make the Z-1p even cheaper it will surely be a hit. Well, it didn't happen. Instead, as we all know, Pentax were seen as cheap - an entry level manufacurer with no upgrade path. All the above is based on facts with some speculation thrown in.... Pål
