Re: Moving to AF: PZ1P or MZ-S? Pentax or Nikon?

[Paul]

The AF performance of Canon EOS 1n still performs very well when 
conpared to newer high end AF bodies.  The price of these is quite good 
also in the current market, might be something worth considering.

Patrick Pritchard wrote:



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 current (or
maybe a generation back) pro bodies. The mid level or older pro bodies
aren't any better than the MZ-S.


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.

MZ-S is still double the price of F4.

And by your definition, isn'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? Pentax or Nikon?
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, it may not be the best choice.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Monday, March 22, 2004, 6:28:50 PM, you wrote:

AF> By all reports the (P)Z1p is a dustcatcher.  That could
be a problem in
AF> central Australia.  Rob Studdert could probably tell you
what you need to
AF> know regarding this.  If your choice is Pentax then the
MZ-S might be
AF> better.  It doesn't have gaskets against dust penetration
as did the LX (and
AF> I think the top level Nikons) but is built to very close
tolerances with the
AF> intention of resisting dust and moisture, or so I've read.
AF> regards,
AF> Anthony Farr
AF> ----- Original Message -----
AF> From: "Patrick Pritchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hello all.

I've decided that within the next year (specifically,

before September

2005) I would like to move up to AF.  This is mainly

because I will be

in Australia doing some shoots at the World Solar

Challenge, where MF

didn't quite cut it last time I was out.  I'd also like to

move into

more sports, where AF would be a huge advantage.

My dilemma is this:

- should I stay with Pentax, or go with Nikon (I'm leaning

towards a

used F4)
- If I stay with Pentax, should I go with PZ1P or MZ-S?
AF> (snip)