Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
So it is strange. I also did similar test with the lamp. But centerweighted meter is quite similar to spot if you fill the finder with light/lamp for instance and not only in this case. I shall check in manual. But if it does not work it could not be dispalyed if you are working in spot meter. SO I do not know what to say. So only pversion has spot with K and M lenses? Really strange Alek [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Alek, There must be some kind of a language barrier here. Read my post again, Mark\'s too. I did the same experiment. I used a K24/2.8 lens (wide angle lens) with the PZ-1 (Z-1 by you). I was 6 feet (2 meters) from a table lamp that I focused on. The lamp just filled the finder [ focus ] area. Using a wide angle lens, I was seeing a dark room with a bright lamp in the middle. Yes with the PZ-1, the little * goes ON in the LCD display. NO, this doesn\'t mean anything. The exposure doesn\'t change!!! The PZ-1 says you have spot metering but you don\'t! It is telling you lies!!! With the PZ-1p, you have spot metering. I put the K24/2.8 lens on the camera. I focused on the light... it just filled the [focus] in the viewfinder. When I pressed the spot button, the * went on in the viewfinder, and the exposure changed. This was for the PZ-1p only - Z-1p by you. I don\'t know how to make this explaination any clearer. Regards, Bob S. In a message dated 2/7/2003 10:27:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bob, With PZ1 you have spot for sure with K and M lenses!!! Just click the buttom on the back of the camera - it was with . one and then turn the wheel ( I do not remember if it is AV or TV) in front of the camera, just near shutter buttom, remember to keep . buttom pushed! and turn it. On the display you will see in the frame * informing you that spot is set.just all. I own PZ1 and some K and M it WORKS. Reply to me if you manage to do it. Hope it helps. Cheers, Alek PS you wrote exposure did not change, sometimes you could set on the subjects where there is no difference in light, that is it. Good luck and be happy with spot with you K and M lenses:) [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: My Z1 spot meters with all my pentax lenses, K,M,A,F,FA. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don\\\'t know. I\\\'ll go home and try it, but I remember trying to get my M\\\'s K\\\'s to spot meter and they didn\\\'t. They will say SPOT metering is ON in the viewfinder, but the exposure won\\\'t change. Just tried my PZ-1p with a K50/1.4 and both spot and center-weighted metering work - and the exposure definitely does change (I metered in a dark room with a small window in the center). -- Mark Roberts Mark, I did the same experiment this AM. The PZ-1p will spot meter with a K lens (tried the K24/2.8). The PZ-1 will not spot meter with a K lens. So I\\\'d revise what I said to this... PZ-1: NO Spot metering with K and M lenses, you need A,F,FA and NO matrix metering with K M, only Center Weighted. PZ-1p: Center Weighted OR Spot metering with K M lenses and NO matrix metering with K M, only Center Weighted. and Spot, Matrix, or Center Weighted with A, F FA lens. Thanks to you and Paal for pointing that feature out, I had missed it on the PZ-1p. Regards, Bob S. --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Tanie bilety lotnicze! http://samoloty.onet.pl
Re: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
Hi, So FA 200 macro must be much better than C/N counterparts. Do you have both?What is the price of A version if appears. BTW Do you have FA35/2.0?any comments... Thank you Alek Uytkownik Pl Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Alek wrote: But with K and M lenses you could not use matrix... just central or spot and??? Do you have Pentax FA 200/4 ED macro lens? Or A200/4 ED macro? If so which is better? If pressed I think the FA* is slightly better but significantly larger and heavier. What about competition in this range-Nikon/Canon/Sigma?ANy comments... According to the only test I\'ve seen on the 200 macro lenses the A* 200/4 macro beats the Nikon and Canon counterparts. Pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: dua, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/
Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
Hi, When you use 645 lens it works like A lens or only like K or ?Does matrix work? Alek Uytkownik gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Joe Wilensky wrote: On another note, why can the Pentax autofocus cameras provide autofocus confirmation with manual-focus A, M, and K lenses, but not with screwmount lenses via the adapter? In the case of the M and K Are you sure they can\'t? My ZX-5n\'s focus confirmation beep works just fine when I used a 645 lens mounted via the 645-K adapter. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Tanie bilety lotnicze! http://samoloty.onet.pl
Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
Thanks! But Alan Chan wrote even good tape could mask a special part of the lens. So maybe it is saver and easier and for nearly nothing ($) :) Alek =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Michel_Carre=60re-G=E9e?=@UNKNOWN napisa: [EMAIL PROTECTED] a crit: But with K and M lenses you could not use matrix... just central or spot .. Yes, K/M lens could use matrix metering, see: http://www.robertstech.com/matrix.htm http://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/Photo/multizone.htm Michel --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Tanie bilety lotnicze! http://samoloty.onet.pl
Re: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
Hi I also read about drilling in the lens But it I could just mask it would be great. Please write what to do with K28/3.5, 135/2.5 and 105/2.8 all SMC of course if you have them Alek Uytkownik Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: But with K and M lenses you could not use matrix... just central or spot You can mask part of the lens mount of K or M lenses to simulate A lenses which can do matrix metering. A good quality masking tape will do the trick. regards, Alan Chan _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Miliony czekaj na Ciebie w Internecie! htpp://republika.onet.pl/2,oferta.html
RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
For a comparison of the elements see: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-i.jpg and http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-ii.gif The internal focus on the FA200 is invaluable for macro work. Plus, the FA is RAZOR sharp at all apertures and even sharper in the f/8 to f/32 range - sharper than the A200. The A200 is very good in the f/8 to f/22 range but not as sharp as the FA200. The FA200 has 9 Aperture Blades vs. the 8 on the A200. This I think leads to a softer bokeh on the FA200. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 10:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, But is there any optical difference between A and FA for macro work?Sharpness, bokeh etc?Also FA is better? Alek Uytkownik Vick, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: I don\'t have any direct comparison with Cannon or Nikon, but have used both the FA200 ED Macro and the A200 ED Macro. The FA200 (IF) is AWESOME - I can find no faults with it, razor sharp, excellent bokeh, I like the Internal Focus and the focus limiter provides excellent and quick focusing. The A200 is a very good lens but not quite as sharp as the FA200 at the extremes. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 9:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, So FA 200 macro must be much better than C/N counterparts. Do you have both?What is the price of A version if appears. BTW Do you have FA35/2.0?any comments... Thank you Alek Uytkownik Pl Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Alek wrote: But with K and M lenses you could not use matrix... just central or spot and??? Do you have Pentax FA 200/4 ED macro lens? Or A200/4 ED macro? If so which is better? If pressed I think the FA* is slightly better but significantly larger and heavier. What about competition in this range-Nikon/Canon/Sigma?ANy comments... According to the only test I\\\'ve seen on the 200 macro lenses the A* 200/4 macro beats the Nikon and Canon counterparts. Pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: dua, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/ --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Hotele - rezerwuj do 40% TANIEJ! http://noclegi.onet.pl
Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
Thank you! You are lucky man to have such a lens. It must be one if not the best in this focal range or any macro lens. Do you have any picture from it on website? Alek Uytkownik Vick, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: For a comparison of the elements see: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-i.jpg and http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-ii.gif The internal focus on the FA200 is invaluable for macro work. Plus, the FA is RAZOR sharp at all apertures and even sharper in the f/8 to f/32 range - sharper than the A200. The A200 is very good in the f/8 to f/22 range but not as sharp as the FA200. The FA200 has 9 Aperture Blades vs. the 8 on the A200. This I think leads to a softer bokeh on the FA200. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 10:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, But is there any optical difference between A and FA for macro work?Sharpness, bokeh etc?Also FA is better? Alek Uytkownik Vick, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: I don\\\'t have any direct comparison with Cannon or Nikon, but have used both the FA200 ED Macro and the A200 ED Macro. The FA200 (IF) is AWESOME - I can find no faults with it, razor sharp, excellent bokeh, I like the Internal Focus and the focus limiter provides excellent and quick focusing. The A200 is a very good lens but not quite as sharp as the FA200 at the extremes. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 9:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, So FA 200 macro must be much better than C/N counterparts. Do you have both?What is the price of A version if appears. BTW Do you have FA35/2.0?any comments... Thank you Alek Uytkownik Pl Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Alek wrote: But with K and M lenses you could not use matrix... just central or spot and??? Do you have Pentax FA 200/4 ED macro lens? Or A200/4 ED macro? If so which is better? If pressed I think the FA* is slightly better but significantly larger and heavier. What about competition in this range-Nikon/Canon/Sigma?ANy comments... According to the only test I\\\'ve seen on the 200 macro lenses the A* 200/4 macro beats the Nikon and Canon counterparts. Pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: dua, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/ --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Hotele - rezerwuj do 40% TANIEJ! http://noclegi.onet.pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Tanie bilety lotnicze! http://samoloty.onet.pl
Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When you use 645 lens it works like A lens or only like K or ?Does matrix work? Keep in mind, this is NOT on a PZ1, it is on the MZ-5n. The 645-K adapter is just a hunk of metal. It passes no information through. No contacts. No Auto aperature, nothing. When I mount my 645 lenses on the MZ-5n, it treats it just like a classic K lens: Center weighted or spot metering. I wonder if I can do the matrix metering trick.. I should look into it, I'm not even sure what it entails. Hmm.. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
RE: RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
the macro shots on this page were done with the FA200 http://www.blueplanetmedia.com/photo.htm Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:45 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Thank you! You are lucky man to have such a lens. It must be one if not the best in this focal range or any macro lens. Do you have any picture from it on website? Alek Uytkownik Vick, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: For a comparison of the elements see: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-i.jpg and http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-ii.gif The internal focus on the FA200 is invaluable for macro work. Plus, the FA is RAZOR sharp at all apertures and even sharper in the f/8 to f/32 range - sharper than the A200. The A200 is very good in the f/8 to f/22 range but not as sharp as the FA200. The FA200 has 9 Aperture Blades vs. the 8 on the A200. This I think leads to a softer bokeh on the FA200. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 10:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, But is there any optical difference between A and FA for macro work?Sharpness, bokeh etc?Also FA is better? Alek Uytkownik Vick, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: I don\\\'t have any direct comparison with Cannon or Nikon, but have used both the FA200 ED Macro and the A200 ED Macro. The FA200 (IF) is AWESOME - I can find no faults with it, razor sharp, excellent bokeh, I like the Internal Focus and the focus limiter provides excellent and quick focusing. The A200 is a very good lens but not quite as sharp as the FA200 at the extremes. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 9:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, So FA 200 macro must be much better than C/N counterparts. Do you have both?What is the price of A version if appears. BTW Do you have FA35/2.0?any comments... Thank you Alek Uytkownik Pl Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Alek wrote: But with K and M lenses you could not use matrix... just central or spot and??? Do you have Pentax FA 200/4 ED macro lens? Or A200/4 ED macro? If so which is better? If pressed I think the FA* is slightly better but significantly larger and heavier. What about competition in this range-Nikon/Canon/Sigma?ANy comments... According to the only test I\\\'ve seen on the 200 macro lenses the A* 200/4 macro beats the Nikon and Canon counterparts. Pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: dua, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/ --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Hotele - rezerwuj do 40% TANIEJ! http://noclegi.onet.pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Tanie bilety lotnicze! http://samoloty.onet.pl
Re: RE: RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
nice! pity there no true macro photos like on Mark Cassino. If you like macro look here: http://www.grochowalski.pl click English version Alek PS My friend's web site Uytkownik Vick, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: the macro shots on this page were done with the FA200 http://www.blueplanetmedia.com/photo.htm Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:45 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Thank you! You are lucky man to have such a lens. It must be one if not the best in this focal range or any macro lens. Do you have any picture from it on website? Alek Uytkownik Vick, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: For a comparison of the elements see: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-i.jpg and http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-ii.gif The internal focus on the FA200 is invaluable for macro work. Plus, the FA is RAZOR sharp at all apertures and even sharper in the f/8 to f/32 range - sharper than the A200. The A200 is very good in the f/8 to f/22 range but not as sharp as the FA200. The FA200 has 9 Aperture Blades vs. the 8 on the A200. This I think leads to a softer bokeh on the FA200. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 10:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, But is there any optical difference between A and FA for macro work?Sharpness, bokeh etc?Also FA is better? Alek Uytkownik Vick, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: I don\\\'t have any direct comparison with Cannon or Nikon, but have used both the FA200 ED Macro and the A200 ED Macro. The FA200 (IF) is AWESOME - I can find no faults with it, razor sharp, excellent bokeh, I like the Internal Focus and the focus limiter provides excellent and quick focusing. The A200 is a very good lens but not quite as sharp as the FA200 at the extremes. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 9:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ Hi, So FA 200 macro must be much better than C/N counterparts. Do you have both?What is the price of A version if appears. BTW Do you have FA35/2.0?any comments... Thank you Alek Uytkownik Pl Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Alek wrote: But with K and M lenses you could not use matrix... just central or spot and??? Do you have Pentax FA 200/4 ED macro lens? Or A200/4 ED macro? If so which is better? If pressed I think the FA* is slightly better but significantly larger and heavier. What about competition in this range-Nikon/Canon/Sigma?ANy comments... According to the only test I\\\'ve seen on the 200 macro lenses the A* 200/4 macro beats the Nikon and Canon counterparts. Pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: dua, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/ --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Hotele - rezerwuj do 40% TANIEJ! http://noclegi.onet.pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Tanie bilety lotnicze! http://samoloty.onet.pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- Tanie bilety lotnicze! http://samoloty.onet.pl
Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
Hi, I must simple test some old lenses with different ways of metering. And I should see how it works with different lenses. Cheers, Alek Uytkownik Joe Wilensky [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: On the PZ-1, Pentax Function 1 (labeled AE) selects whether the camera switches from matrix to spot or from matrix to centerweighted when using the metering mode button. The value of 0 selects spotmetering as the alternate; a value of 1 selects centerweighted. So yes, you can specify centerweighted metering for A lenses (and F and FA lenses as well). Of course, with M and K lenses, there\'s no matrix metering available at all, so for those lenses this Pentax function would only serve to turn off the option of spotmetering altogether. Joe Hi, Thank you! With A lens the metering was very good on slides. Now I am checking with K ones.But PZ1 does not have switch from matrix to central metering with A lenses,probably from matrix to spot only if I remember well Alek [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa?: I have both the PZ-1 and PZ-1p and find they both consistently overexpose slide film when using older lenses (KA mounts - if I remember mount designations correctly) when the cameras are set to matrix or evaluative metering (whatever Pentax calls it). When these bodies are set to centerweight or spot metering the overexposure does not seem to occur. When using non F or FA lenses or when I may be using a combination of new and older lenses with these bodies I routinely set metering to centerweight. I have been doing this so long I do not remember which of my lenses tend to overexpose with these cameras. From what I remember of early discussions on this matter results may very. Some (like myself) say overexposure occurs most of the time, some say it happens some times, some say it does not occur. Hope this helps. George Baumgardner --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: duza, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/ --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: dua, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/
Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
Alek wrote: But with K and M lenses you could not use matrix... just central or spot and??? Do you have Pentax FA 200/4 ED macro lens? Or A200/4 ED macro? If so which is better? If pressed I think the FA* is slightly better but significantly larger and heavier. What about competition in this range-Nikon/Canon/Sigma?ANy comments... According to the only test I've seen on the 200 macro lenses the A* 200/4 macro beats the Nikon and Canon counterparts. Pål
Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
Do you have a diagram that shows which contacts to mask off on the K and M lenses? You can check out this page and determine exactly which part of the lens mount (not camera mount) to mask (just use a ruler to measure the distance). You need to use a little imagination on how to do it. I myself use a hobby masking tape (which wouldn't peel itself off, unlike other masking tapes) from Testors. I just shape it to fit the lens mount (don't cut on the lens mount because the cutting blades will leave deep cutting marks). Also, you don't want something too thick which makes mounting the lens difficult. http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/extras/K-mount/Ka.html regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
With A 50/1.7 exposures were great. The difference is with older lenses. So now you have MZS.. Better than Pz-1p?I have read some reviews and many people believe PZ1p has more features and not so expensive. It is truth. Alek Uytkownik Pl Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Alek wrote: I am going to use PZ1 with some my K lenses. Is it truth that there appears overexposure of 2/3 EV? Now I checking it using Velvia but on the basis of some measurements it really seems to me that overexposure occurs. Any comments...So the correction is needed. I do hope it is constant with all my K lenses. With A the problem probably does not take place. No idea but it did happen with two of my A lenses: the A 24/2.8 and the A 35/2.8. I don\'t really remember the details anymore as I don\'t own the camera anylonger. Pl --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: dua, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/
Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
Hi But I have not written I use print film!! And you wrote that with PZ1p you had 1/2 stop but over or under?rather overexposure... So Pz1p usually overexposure and PZ1 not? So maybe it is better to buy another PZ1 instead of PZ1p? Do you know if I can do flash compensation with PZ1? For instance I want to shoot a portrait of someone who is in shadow and background is brighter so I would measure b. light and compensate flash for about from -1 to -1.5 EV?Can I do so with PZ1?And Pz1p? Please answer Alek [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisa: Alek, I never had any problems with the PZ-1 exposing slide film accurately. Any problems with print film were masked by the corrections done by the print machines. The PZ-1p seems to be a bit off (1/2 stop) with slide film, but just fine with print film. And I don\'t think you could judge any exposure errors with print films anyway... at least not 1/2 stop ones. Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dear All, I am going to use PZ1 with some my K lenses. Is it truth that there appears overexposure of 2/3 EV? Now I checking it using Velvia but on the basis of some measurements it really seems to me that overexposure occurs. Any comments...So the correction is needed. I do hope it is constant with all my K lenses. With A the problem probably does not take place. Alek --r-e-k-l-a-m-a- OnetPoczta: dua, szybka, bezpieczna! http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/
Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+
Alek wrote: With A 50/1.7 exposures were great. The difference is with older lenses. With mine it was the other way around and only in matrix metering if memory serves me right. So now you have MZS.. Better than Pz-1p? I think so. I have read some reviews and many people believe PZ1p has more features and not so expensive. It is truth. The MZ-S is more expensive but it does in fact have more features than the Z-1p if you count them. It does, however, have slower max fps rate and max shutterspeed. Pål
