Tom has hit the nail on the head here. We do become accustomed to a particular way of doing things and then that seems right. Before using the PZ-1p, I was using a SuperProgram. In learning the PZ-1p, I had to change my ways and habits a bit. I eventually became accustomed to it and found it enjoyable to use. But it didn't happen immediately. Switching to the MZ-S was quite the same way. I had to get used to a different way again. For the first few days, the PZ-1p seemed quicker and easier. But, after a while, I became accustomed to the MZ-S interface and now find it easier to use than the PZ-1p.
I do find it somewhat amusing about this thread in that it is very similar to the Nikon N70/N80 interface debates. The N70 is very similar to the PZ-1p is concept. Hold in a button, spin a dial to the right menu type of thing. This interface is quite easy to understand and learn. But in use, it becomes slow and clumsy at times. The N70 has never been well accepted by the masses for it's user interface and I believe that the PZ-1p has suffered much the same fate. When you design human interfaces, you have to take into account ease of learning, ease of daily use and power users. Quite often these are at odds with each other and you must make compromises. Both the PZ-1p and MZ-S have addressed these things in different ways. The type of user you are will determine how you react to the interface. Obviously, to Pentax, the interface that most users like is going to sell more cameras. Based on market acceptance, one could conclude that the MZ-5 interface is more acceptable than the PZ-1p interface. The MZ-S follow more closely with the MZ-5 style. I believe that if the PZ-1p had been widely acclaimed for it's interface, the MZ-S would have modeled more closely to it. Bruce Dayton Thursday, December 27, 2001, 9:08:07 AM, you wrote: a> I agree 100%. It is very nice to spin the dials w/o taking the eye from the a> viewfinder. a> The thing this thread is inevitably showing is that our sensory inputs a> become accustomed to certain stimuli. We tend to become familiar with a a> camera body, and then enjoy using it. a> Tom C. a> ----- Original Message ----- a> From: "Artur Led�chowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 7:53 AM a> Subject: Odp: I love the PZ-1p >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: I love the PZ-1p >> >> >> > Aperture control on the body is MUCH better than using >> > the aperture ring on the MZ-S. This is a BIG problem with the MZ-S and >> zoom >> > lenses. Hyper manual should have been a feature on the MZ-S, in my >> opinion. >> > Heck...you can even change the aperture on the body of the ZX-7. >> >> EXACTLY!:) I have the MZ-7 and love the ability to control the aperture a> from >> the body, since it allows me to do every operation without taking my eye >> from the viewfinder. I have everything under control of my index a> fingers... >> That in the MZ-S the Av operates by turning the aperture ring was quite a >> disappointment to me. I've never owed neither a Z-1p nor the MZ-S, but >> played with a Z-1 and a Z-50 - I had NO problem with mastering the control >> of them without ANY manual (except for PF's, of course:)). a> <snip> a> - a> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, a> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to a> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - 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 .
