I'm a bit surprised that the consensus is to praise
the MZ-S for its size and weight.
I was able to hold one last week for the first time
(though hold it was all I was able to do--it had given
up the ghost mid-way through its first roll of film
and was headed back to Pentax).
Certainly an impressive machine, but too small for my
hands and too light for my taste.
Reminded me of the time I was considering buying a
Miata. Didn't take more than a few minutes behind the
wheel for me to see that, despite its many virtues, it
wasn't the car for me. Headroom, legroom, hiproom--it
was just too damn small. In the same way, the MZ-S is
a 7/10ths version of a camera I'd like to buy. (I've
already made the mistake of buying a ZX-5N, which I
almost never use because even with the battery pack
it's uncomfortably small and awkward for me to use.)
I realize, of course, that YMM, and probably does, V.
Which brings me to Pal's autofocus LX. My eyes have
never been particularly good, and it's getting to the
point where I'm going to have to think about going AF
or shooting only with my Contax IIIa, a '50s
rangefinder that's still wonderfully easy to focus.
An AF camera with the feel and heft (and metal
construction) of an LX would be awfully nice.
Assuming that I could afford it. A camera with AF
built to LX standards would cost how many thousands of
dollars?
=====
John Edwin Mason
Charlottesville, Virginia
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
alt email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
-
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 .
