on 6/23/03 9:29 AM, tom at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Lon Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> Mebbe what we ought to do is place an MZ-S in TV's hands for >> 6 months (if he doesn't have one) and get a report back. >> That would settle build quality and durability. Grin. > > I had 2 of them for about a year, they didn't break. I think it's a > solid camera except for the back. > > tv > > > I bought one of Tom's from him, it became my second MZ-S. Apart from the fact the he removed and lost every single cover from every single body aperture, (<VBG>) the camera is in fine shape. Like the old Timex watches, they take a licking and keep on ticking no matter what John Cameron Swazey or Tom does to them...
Anyone who has not at least held the MZ-S, better yet used it, is really missing out on a treat. I hope that the *istD I have on order has at least some of the character of this camera. Users of Spotmatics or LXen would feel very at home with the MZ-S. And I am constantly amazed at how accurate the light meter is. (For brad dodo, aka caveperson in Canada, accurate = reliable [consistently repeatable measurement] and valid [close approximation to ideal measure, as judged from results.]) I have had cameras before that were reliable (like my old Nikon, it was always wrong) but never one that was this spot-on valid. BTW, my "on-order" D is really on virtual order because my shop's rep won't accept a formal order until Pentax USA announces that there is such a camera in production someplace, to be delivered sometime at some stated price... Once I do have the *istD, if it comes close to meeting my expectations, I'll have my remaining LX, my 645's, and one of the MZ-S up for sale, along with a few of the classic lenses... stay tuned. Stan
