I sold my *istD for $666 US two weeks ago. Put that saw away. Paul On Sep 17, 2006, at 6:54 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> On 18/09/06, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> And with many long telephotos - the FA*80-200/2.8 comes to mind - the >> aperture ring is damned difficult to get at when you have the battery >> grip on the camera and/or you're using a tripod. This was one of the >> reasons I decided to sell my MZ-S a couple of months ago; it was just >> so inconvenient using the aperture ring with several of the lenses I >> use a lot and the MZ-S had a single-dial control system. Despite its >> other strong points, I regarded this as a major ergonomic failure of >> the MZ-S and I really missed it when I sold my PZ-1p. > > Interesting, I don't have the grip, I don't often shoot longer than > 200 (if I did I'd probably own a Canon system by now) and most often > I'm shooting with compact prime lenses. So in my case aperture > priority on the lens is quite viable. Or rather it would be if the > camera had aperture coupling and didn't have that ridiculous > overhanging RTF (I've thought of sawing it off my *ist now that it's > worth little more than a paper weight). > > Now wouldn't it be just dandy if the user had the choice to operate > both ways? This is my point, not that one mode of operation is far > superior that the other but that the exclusion of one mode of > operation has eliminated a comfortable mode of operation for some of > us when both modes could readily be accommodated. > > -- > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
