Vic wrote:
> Pal: you are absolutely right. if Canon or Nikon marketed the MZS it would be
> considered brilliant. The perfect backup body for pros looking for a lighter,
> professionally built camera with everything they need to get the job done.
> pros and amateurs alike would be eating them up. Of course Nikon and Canon
> would go to the trouble to market them. And that's the difference.
I strongly believe that the MZ-S is designed to be the number two body. This also
explains the comparison with the EOS3 and F100 both "light" versions of the top
models. It explains as well that the MZ-S was released with mid line lenses and
acessories.
Pentax have said that they have no intention of making F5 clones and the difference
between the MZ-S and the F100 can possibly be explained by this fact. The MZ-S doesn't
provide manual aperture control from the body and might well be because the flagship
won't either. Hence, it may function as a back-up body for that flagship with the same
general interface.
Although its true that the MZ-S owns its existence due to a digital body, it still
need to fit the future 35mm slr camera line-up.
Maybe the MZ-S can be considered a 2001 equivalent of the ME Super or perhaps a fusion
of the ME Super and the MX? That is, they may fill a similar role as those cameras in
the future Pentax line-up.
P�l
-
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 .
