* Paul wrote:
Without holding the MZ-S, I lean to the Canon EOS3 which according to the specs has
better focussing, higher frames per minute and better lenses.
A friend of mine has the EOS 3, and the shutter sounds like a metal can with some
small screws in it. The body has a very plastic feeling. All in all, I rate the build
quality of my MZ-5N higher than his EOS 3.
The exposure meter in the EOS 3 may seem very impressive at first glance, but ending
results are not as good as the results from my MZ-5N. The reason for this is that the
EOS serie has a tendency to underexpose, some blaim the connection to the selected
focus point for this.
I'm sure that the MZ-S in terms of build quality and handling is far superior the EOS
3.
>Call me a neanderthol, and I am sure many people off the >list will hammer me, but in
>every test I have ever seen >Pentax lenses are among the worst on test but yet among
>>the most expensive!
I wonder what tests you've read.
As all other manufacturer, Pentax makes some good and some bad lenses. The bad lenses
are the true budget offerings (like the FA 28-80 f/3.5-5.6), and the good lenses are
the primes and the high-end zooms.
For example, the FA 50 f/1.4 is a steal, Zeiss performance at the lowest price of all
50 f/1.4.
FA 43 and 77 Limited has also won many friends and great results in tests.
FA Star 28-70 f/2.8 was a true star performer in a test made by the swedish mag FOTO,
it was also the least expensive option from the "big 4" (Canon, Minolta, Nikon,
Pentax). Sigma and Tokina was less expensive, but not as good.
etc. etc.
I'm sure the new FA 28-90 f/3.5-4.5 AL (IF) with two aspherical elements and extra low
dispersion glass will be a winner too.
Regards,
*
Roland Mabo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.algonet.se/~rolamo
-
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 .
