Len, I think you got my point. Paper only comparisons are not very good. One needs to hold and use the camera to decide if it is for them or not. I recommended doing that very thing. I brought up the Rebel because it is very obvious to anyone who has hefted one how poorly it is built. But it's spec sheet looks pretty good.
Having used quite heavily both PZ-1p's and MZ-S's, I thought I was quite fair in trying to state differences rather than proclaiming one better than the other. Bruce Dayton Thursday, January 31, 2002, 11:45:42 AM, you wrote: PL> So I guess that means that our PZ-1p's are no better than Canon Rebels PL> because of how they look on paper. Right? I guess that means the Nikon PL> N90s was even worse because the PZ-1p is a better performer than the N90s. PL> There's a disconnect there somewhere. My opinion of the Canon Rebel is that PL> it would make a great ashtray, if you take off the lens. PL> We shouldn't be making these kind of comparisons. PL> Len PL> --- PL> -----Original Message----- PL> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] PL> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 11:42 AM PL> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PL> Subject: Re: which one to choose? PL> Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >> On paper, the PZ-1p looks formidable. It has a large number of >> features and high end specifications. Remember though, that a Canon >> Rebel also looks good on paper. PL> Ouch! PL> tv PL> - PL> - PL> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, PL> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to PL> 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 .
