No, there is no difference except for the name. I wouldn't say that the 10, 50, 60 are higher models at all, although it is difficult to explain since the numbers do not follow clear logics (at least to me). The bottom down models were the MZ-50, replaced by the 30 and then by the 60. Teh are not compatible with pre-A lenses. Then there were the MZ-10(older), the MZ-7 and MZ-6, that were a bit more advanced. All theses models does not have the classical interface of the MZ-M/5/5n/3, but have the typical shooting modes: sports, night, portrait, landscape...that the 'classical' don't have. The MZ-3 is the more advanced of the series but is so similar to the 5n that I don't think it is worth it. Ah, and there is the top of the tops, the MZ-S, but this one is in another league.
Mmmm, I think that it is time that you visit the excellent 'Pentax K-mount bible' aka Boz's site: http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/ and look for the Bodies/MZ series. Have fun !! Jaume ----- Mensaje original ---- De: Glen Tortorella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> Enviado: miércoles, 5 de septiembre, 2007 16:26:53 Asunto: Re: Metering Question Thank you, Jaume. The MZ-5n (ZX-5n) looks interesting. Is there any difference in the Euro and American versions (i.e. MZ and ZX)? Also, do the "higher" models in this series have the same functionality (ZX-10, 50, 60, etc.)? Thanks, Glen On Sep 5, 2007, at 10:03 AM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: > Normally there is a setting that lets you switch between > multisegment, CW and spot metering. > (Spot is when the reading is taken only in a small circle in the > center of the image). > > Unfortunately, the MZ-M (ZX-M in the US) does not have it, and this > is one of the reasos for my upgrade to the MZ-5n (ZX-5n), a more > advanced camera with AF, built-in flash and 3 metering options (the > multi-segment also has more different segments into account). > The interface of the camera is the same "classic type" as the MZ-M > though, so you feel at home when handling one. > > My advice is to get a MZ-5n instead of another MZ-M. In these days, > they shouldn't be that much difference in price between them. > > Jaume > > ----- Mensaje original ---- > De: Glen Tortorella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > Enviado: miércoles, 5 de septiembre, 2007 15:30:47 > Asunto: Re: Metering Question > > Thank you Godfrey, et. al... > > Godfrey: when you say that good modern cameras allow for both CW and > multi-segment, do you mean this in terms of a setting (a switch) made > on the camera body? I ask because my ZX-M goes into CW mode when > using an older lens (i.e. an M-series lens). Is this what you had > meant, or were you referring to a body setting? I have not noted a > body setting on my ZX-M for CW metering. I just love the ZX-M-- > especially with the added weight of the battery pack--and I would not > want to have to part with it (in fact, I am thinking of getting > another ZX-M body)...unless it were inhibiting my skill development > in some way. Advice is welcome. > > Thanks again, > Glen > > On Sep 4, 2007, at 11:39 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > >> Glen Tortorella wrote: >>> Is multi-segment metering always better than center-weighted >>> metering? My ZX-M has TTL multi (2)-segment metering, while my >>> Super >>> Program has open aperture, TTL center-weighted metering. From >>> what I >>> know about the matter, multi-segment is more precise, but I >>> thought I >>> would inquire about this, as I am not an expert. >> >> Multi-segment metering generally is evaluative: camera makes light >> readings of several areas and compares a "signature" of the >> distribution of metered values to some reference signatures, develops >> an exposure setting based on that comparison. >> >> Center-weighted metering is simpler: it is integrating the brightness >> across the whole screen but biasing the center-most area as being >> most important, without regards to individual area measurements. >> >> There are times and reasons for the use of both metering options. If >> you want to use exposure automation to it's fullest capabilities in a >> hands-off manner, multi-segment metering generally does a better job >> since it is looking for scene signatures and trying to do a best fit, >> one way or another. However, exactly what it's doing is sometimes not >> easy to predict. If, on the other hand, you want to meter manually >> and stay in complete control of the exposure setting, CW Averaging is >> simple enough that you can generally understand precisely what the >> meter is doing and make your own judgments as to where to place the >> exposure. >> >> This is why any good modern camera worth using that allows manual >> settings has both .... >> >> Godfrey >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ______________ > Sé un Mejor Amante del Cine > ¿Quieres saber cómo? ¡Deja que otras personas te ayuden! > http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/reto/entretenimiento.html > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net ____________________________________________________________________________________ Sé un Mejor Amante del Cine ¿Quieres saber cómo? ¡Deja que otras personas te ayuden! http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/reto/entretenimiento.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
