One of the features of motor wound bodies that gets me down is the fact that
the film is rewound right back into the cassette in most cases - as far as I
know.
This is a nuisance. I load my Nikkor reels directly from the cassette. I
have not had a finger print or a scratch on a film for years. Trimming the
end is very easy. You can see what you're doing and don't have to mess with
scissors in the dark. I know its easy to fish out the end, but this involves
messing around and may also scratch the film.

The P30 and P30t bodies I use suit me perfectly. I like the ME super too,
but don't like the film transport at all. Winding the film in the opposite
direction is a misguided attempt to either keep the film flat in the focal
plane or reduce the amount of spring in the roll of film. I don't know
which, but its a bad idea. If a film is left in the camera for any length of
time, it gets a permanent bend that is very difficult to deal with when
loading a reel. A couple of weeks is enough. If this happens to you its best
to take the film to a processing lab. The machines can handle a bent film,
but loading one into a reel is very difficult.

Don

Dr E D F Williams

http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002


----- Original Message -----
From: "James Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 1:12 AM
Subject: Re: P-3 vs ZX-M


> I would go with the ZX-M.  It has more shutter and aperture priority that
> the P-3 does not have.  It also has a built in motor drive.  A quick look
at
> Boz's web sit will give the full list of features on both.  The main
> distracion on the ZX-M is it does not have a metal lens mount.
>
> Jim Fellows
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dan Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Pentax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "Dan Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 5:58 PM
> Subject: P-3 vs ZX-M
>
>
> > Any reason why a user should prefer one over the other in equivalent
> > "used" condition?
> >
> > Dan Scott
> >
> >
>
>


Reply via email to