In my case, it does serve a purpose. I can leave the lens set on the "A" position and vary the aperture, using the AV wheel, within the range of available shutter speeds to achieve the selective focus effects that I desire. I agree that this is nothing that could not be done with a completely manual camera and a good handheld light meter. It's just handy to be able to do it when I want to and not have to carry anything beyond the camera and lens itself.
Being a geezer, my eyes aren't as good as they were when I was younger so I appreciate AF and the extra control the PZ-1p gives me. I still have fully manual cameras that I use when I can shoot more at my leisure. The results I get from them are most satisfying. But, when I'm on a job, I need all the help I can get. So far the PZ-1p has been very good to me. Len --- > -----Original Message----- > From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2002 12:00 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Why I won't be buying an MZ-S > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Len Paris > Subject: RE: Why I won't be buying an MZ-S > > > > It hasn't failed on mine, so far. If it does, I guess I'll be > forced to > > either get it fixed or just live with only being able to > change the > > aperture setting on the lens. I have read of lenses whose > aperture > > rings have failed, right here on this list. :) > > Agreed. I tend to be a minimalist WRT control sets, in the > belief that the fewer controls (knobs, buttons, whatever) > there are, the simpler the product should be to operate, and > the more reliable the product will be. In the case at hand, > the control dial on the camera is not replacing the aperture > ring on the lens, but is taking it's place in the operation > of the camera. Since the aperture ring is still on the lens, > we now have 2 controls for the same function. One is > redundant. The solution is to either remove the aperture ring > from the lens (not viable IMO, because it makes the lens > useless on all but the few cameras with an AV dial), or not > put the dial on the camera in the first place. For me (and > this is only my opinion) the best option is to not have the > lens control on the body at all. It is needless clutter, and > adds another control function where there are often too many > control functions. I say this from the perspective of someone > who has only passingly used a camera with aperture control on > the body, and didn't like it, not as a regular user of this > sort of function. > > William Robb > >
