It seems that this business about the word professional it the root of a
lot of problems and perhaps we should just accept that different people
have different ideas about what this means. How many cars are
advertised as being sporty while having a wheezy engine under the bonnet
and a couple of spoilers? It is a marketing depts job to raise
expectations of their product and its difficult to say they are lying
because they use deliberately ambiguous terms to do it.
Thinking again about the ISO thing, I suppose a professional at an event
would possibly choose their film for the day and want to push/pull the
whole lot so may want to keep the ISO override. For me I want it to go
back to DX because I will override for a single film or perhaps two and
dont want to forget to reset it back to normal when I am done. But I am
not a professional so perhaps you have a point, although using the PF
seems no worse than using the menus you describe. It seems the other
methods you describe dont allow override of ISO for a single film only
and then revert to DX. This is what I would think most people would
want unless they were eating film for a continuous assignment.
I do think you went over the top about the rewind speed as the sport
professional you describe would surely have two bodies or risk missing
the crucial shot even on faster cameras.
You have a valid point that the features fall short of expectations,
many of the list has complained about the loss of frames per second
compared to the Z1P.
I agree that Pal has perhaps exceeded sinsibility considering he has
never read the article in question, but then he is a purist fanatic and
can get carried away sometimes (no offence meant).
I just wish you had and would acknowledge that the deficiencies were the
price that had to be paid for better build and smaller size/weight. You
agree with this point in your emails but its missing from the article.
This is an important point as it explains that what you are buyinbg is
not an EOS 3 or F100, but an EOS 30/F80 with far better build and
durability. This is why it is priced between the two. To say it is
expensive based on features along is to miss the point.
I hope I have not offended you further and that we can try to reconcile
the differences which seem to have alienated you from the Pentax Users
Group. I apologise again for any suggestions that advertising buys
reviews or that you 'did not read the manual' especially when these came
from people who 'did not read the article'!
Your article is the only one I have read so far which really tested the
product thoroughly and you should be commended for that, I was just
dissapointed that what we feel to be the most important feature of the
camera (the build) was missing from the review. But then no review
could ever be perfect to anyone apart from the reviewer...
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 24 July 2001 09:41
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: More RE: Amateur Photographer MZ-S review
...
...
...
-
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 .
