On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, Doug Brewer wrote:
> ... the f****** LCD panel ...
Wow, I can't get the one I saw to do that. Do you need two MZ-S's to take
advantage of that feature?
> The DOF preview button is, in my opinion, in the perfect place, and I
> don't know why nobody thought of putting it there before now. My
> PZ-1p, LX and MZ-S have the DOFP in different places, so I don't guess
> I have the same feeling of continuity you have.
To be fair, the Super Program, LX, and even MZ-5n all put the DOFP in
roughly the same place, so it's just the upper-end AF bodies that are
changing its position. That being said, I like where it is on the
MZ-S; it makes sense (to me) to put it there on an AF body.
> >So I won't be buying an MZ-S. It wouldn't make me a better
> >photographer. Just a lazier one. It seems an odd beast.
> >Everything is there for it to be a great modern camera. It has
> >lots of buttons and gizmos. It beeps. It has PF. Lots of PF.
> >None of this will make better pictures. The picture is still
> >between me and the subject. The camera is something in between.
> >I think the less between me and the picture, the better.
>
> I never understand this. Why is it mandatory on this list to insult
> anything we don't understand, and by association, those who do bother
> to understand it?
Though I ripped into Bill a bit for some snobbish generalizations, I
didn't have a problem with this paragraph, since he was talking about how
well the MZ-S would (or wouldn't) work for him as an individual. I think
it's fine to say that X wouldn't make *me* a better photographer or that
it's not suited to *my* needs, but I don't see the point in generalizing
these criticisms to apply to everyone who might use the camera.
chris
-
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 .
