No, there are no contradictions in the MZ-S - those that you mention are only in your mind. To take on your naval analogy: how many battleships there are now in active service. With current technology you can sink a battleship from a rowboat (a slight exaggeration). I have not seen the MZ-S touted as the successor of the PZ-1p - not by Pentax anyway - but a successor of the MZ line (and named accordingly) and it works much the same way as other cameras in this line (but it is more complex, of course). The MZ-S is what it is, no more, no less - it has those shortcomings you mention - but all tests have been quite favourable anyway. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
-----Alkuperäinen viesti----- Lähettäjä: Artur Ledóchowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 20. elokuuta 2002 8:04 Aihe: Re: Vs: Next Pentax Flagship Camera? >Użytkownik Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >>The MZ-S owner´s manual does not mention any contradictions. Can you elaborate? > >I can. >What is contradictory about MZ-S is that the camera, that is claimed to be a >successor of Z-1p on the flagship position, is both more and less advanced than Z-1p. >It has great stuff like brand new SAFOX version, P-TTL, HSS, MRC, data imprinting, >magnesium housing, BG-10, wireless flash. On the other hand it has slower shutter and >flash sync, forces the user to control apertures with the ring only, thus making the >implementing of the HyP impossible, amateur class fps rate with no option to boost it >as well as amateur exposure compensation and autobracketing precision of 1/2EV, no AF >sensor of a cross-type, no trailing curtain sync with the RTF only, no built-in flash >compensation, which means also also no flash compensation with the RTF. >The Pentax flagship has been strengthen on one side, but seriously weaken on the >other. If we compare MZ-S to the other flagships, it appears like a destroyer against >battleships - a very capable vehicle, but too weak to hurt them seriously. >For me the existence of MZ-S makes sense only if it was meant to pave a trail for >something stronger, because it is too much an experimental product. It's a good >camera - good enough for me and other intermediate to advanced amateurs, but no more. >It can't even be, say, a back-up pro body. >And one more thing - my subjective view on the Pentax cameras development. MZ-S is >very much like the whole MZ/ZX series - the odd mixture of pros and cons, ups and >downs. From K through Z/PZ series each and every series was internally consistent and >logically both separated and connected to the previous series. They were all like >generations. Each of them has a key feature (or features) that justifies its >existenxce as the separate family, as well none of them is overloaded with different, >yet very similar bodies. MZ/ZX series appears to me as a total chaos. There are too >much bodies in it and these bodies doesn't differ from one another in a logical way, >but because of random selection of features. There is no visible strategy in the >introduction of the new bodies. MZ-S crowns the whole mess well. >I'm really sorry to write it, because I'm a serious Pentax fan and I want my >favourite to prosper well. But the hope is the only thing that left for me. >Artur >- >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 . - 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 .
