Hi,
Patrick Pritchard wrote:
> I've never really liked Canon. Not sure why; I've used them, but then
> again only the lower grade stuff such as the Rebel X. Perhaps an EOS-1
> might be better? Can anyone comment on the EOS-1 AF, or point me to
> some resources?
I've had a good play with a 3.
This I know. It isn't an issue of the AF being the top notch, but given
>that F4 was the flagship at one point, and a LOT of people used it, the AF
>can't be *that* bad, all things considered.
The F-4 was Nikon's first AF pro body. The AF is primitive compared to
current top of the line models.
On Thursday, August 23, 2001, at 03:13 AM, Alan Chan wrote:
My dilemma is this:
- should I stay with Pentax, or go with Nikon (I'm leaning towards a
used F4)
If I remember correctly, F4 was said to be the greatest manual focus
camera ever. Yes, you read it correctly, I said manual focus. The
f
I think that the last Pentax camera body that was really well sealed was
the LX. The PZ-1p certainly is not, and I think that the MZ-S is not
either.
Actually the LX is not only the last sealed camera, but the ONLY one too in
the entire Pentax history so it is quite unrealistic to expect Pentax
This I know. It isn't an issue of the AF being the top notch, but given
that F4 was the flagship at one point, and a LOT of people used it, the AF
can't be *that* bad, all things considered.
Because lots of people were using manual focus with the F4 back then.
Regards,
Alan Chan
http://www.pba
Along with that, even though the FA 135/2.8 isn't a * lens, it is built
like a tank much like the * lenses. It's a very good performer.
The body is built like a tank, but the focusing mecnahism is not. It is
loose and lacks precision for manual focus. Optically, it is inferior to the
M135/3.5 ne
Well, if it is no sealed, then no way the MZ-S will be nearly as dust
resistance as the LX. The dust & water will get inside the MZ-S from the
dials in no time.
Regards,
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
If your choice is Pentax then the MZ-S might be
better. It doesn't have gaskets agains
My dilemma is this:
- should I stay with Pentax, or go with Nikon (I'm leaning towards a used
F4)
If I remember correctly, F4 was said to be the greatest manual focus camera
ever. Yes, you read it correctly, I said manual focus. The first Nikon with
good AF was F90 if I am not mistaken, and F90X
On Tuesday, March 23, 2004, at 12:03 AM, tom wrote:
It's been a few years, but iirc, it was pretty bad. It's nickname was
the
"best manual focus camera Nikon ever made."
*WOW*. Yes, I have received other eMails regarding this off of the
list, and I hear it repeatedly. I haven't done much resea
Hi,
If fast AF is what you need, the Nikon F100 is faster than the F4 or F5.
Steve Larson
Redondo Beach, California
- Original Message -
From: "Patrick Pritchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 6:15 PM
Subject: Moving to AF: PZ1P or MZ-S? Pent
You may want to look at the F90X. I bought on last year as a back up AF body for my
D1,just incase it
went down, i could still shoot film at my horse shows and salvage some sales.
Its a nice camera,AF is fast and the body feels very rugged.
I found a site on the web that had a comparison of the 90
the job.
Andy
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Pritchard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 12:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Moving to AF: PZ1P or MZ-S? Pentax or Nikon?
On Monday, March 22, 2004, at 11:15 PM, tom wrote:
> The AF on the F4 ain't e
Hello Patrick
I have use both AF ans MF for the last 12 years. I think all the cameras you
mention are nice and very high quality. I only own 3 AF lenses. If AF was so
much better, I guess I would have had a lot more AF lenses by now! What is
important is to get a camera you like to use. A camera
F5? Or was the F4S somewhere in between?
-patrick
tv
-Original Message-
From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 10:48 PM
To: Anthony Farr
Subject: Re: Moving to AF: PZ1P or MZ-S? Pentax or Nikon?
Along with that, even though the FA 135/2.8 isn'
I've heard a number of people described the Nikon F4 as Nikons best
manual focus body.
This I know. It isn't an issue of the AF being the top notch, but
given that F4 was the flagship at one point, and a LOT of people used
it, the AF can't be *that* bad, all things considered.
, 2004 9:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Moving to AF: PZ1P or MZ-S? Pentax or Nikon?
The AF on the F4 ain't exactly going to set the world on fire. If you want
noticeably better AF you need to buy one of Nikon or Canon's current (or
maybe a generation back) pro bodies. The mid leve
> -Original Message-
> From: Patrick Pritchard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> On Monday, March 22, 2004, at 11:15 PM, tom wrote:
>
> > The AF on the F4 ain't exactly going to set the world on
> fire. If you
> > want noticeably better AF you need to buy one of Nikon or Canon's
> > c
n't the F4 one generation behind the current
pro line? Pro being F5? Or was the F4S somewhere in between?
-patrick
tv
-Original Message-
From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 10:48 PM
To: Anthony Farr
Subject: Re: Moving to AF: PZ1P or MZ-S? Pe
On Monday, March 22, 2004, at 10:18 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Patrick Pritchard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've read various reports here on the list of Pentax slowly pulling
faster pro grade lenses.
What? Who posted that???
Well, it has been since March 16, 2004 since that is when I
re-subscribe
On Monday, March 22, 2004, at 10:48 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Along with that, even though the FA 135/2.8 isn't a * lens, it is built
like a tank much like the * lenses. It's a very good performer.
Is this true of most Pentax AF? Having never dealt with Pentax AF
before, I'm not sure of build qu
essage-
> From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 10:48 PM
> To: Anthony Farr
> Subject: Re: Moving to AF: PZ1P or MZ-S? Pentax or Nikon?
>
> Along with that, even though the FA 135/2.8 isn't a * lens,
> it is built like a tank
Along with that, even though the FA 135/2.8 isn't a * lens, it is built
like a tank much like the * lenses. It's a very good performer.
My personal hunch is that the Nikon or Canon pro grade bodies are
going to be more rugged and better at AF. Much as I love Pentax, for
what you are describing,
Patrick Pritchard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've read various reports here on the list of Pentax slowly pulling
>faster pro grade lenses.
What? Who posted that???
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
By all reports the (P)Z1p is a dustcatcher. That could be a problem in
central Australia. Rob Studdert could probably tell you what you need to
know regarding this. If your choice is Pentax then the MZ-S might be
better. It doesn't have gaskets against dust penetration as did the LX (and
I thin
24 matches
Mail list logo
