Those Penta-mirrors are terrible or so I've been told, the MZ-5/5n/3 are reasonable but not brilliant with the prism. I guess I was spoilt with the MX. The viewfinder glass on my MZ-3 is positively awfull to view through, I use manual focus mainly despite having several AF lenses. The MZ-6 is one very well specified camera but not very intuitive from the reports I've read, but I guess you just get used to it. I'd have to try one before I buy, I like to be able to adjust everything without taking my eye from the viewfinder, I can with the MZ-3.
John ---------- Original Message ----------- From: Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:40:11 +0200 Subject: Re: MZ-6? > John Whittingham wrote: > > >Maybe it's like the IT industry, it just gets better and cheaper but I doubt > >it. Chassis may not be the only area where the quality differs, I've never > >handled a MZ-6 so I'm not in a position to say. > > > >You've got me curious now, OH NO! NOT ANOTHER CAMERA > > > > > Go out and get it ;-) > > Actually, it turns out that there is one important difference: The > MZ-6 has a plastic penta-whatever-they-call-it in the viewfinder, > while the MZ-5n has a proper glass pentaprism. Apart from this, the > MZ-6 looks like a properly built unit (unlike the MZ-30/50/60), with > metal lens mount, full aperture coupling etc. > > >John > > > >---------- Original Message ----------- > >From: "David Madsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:32:10 -0600 > >Subject: RE: MZ-6? > > > > > > > >>Actually I believe the chassis is identical. The MZ-6 is compatible > >>with the high speed features of the 360fgz. > >> > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Toralf Lund [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 9:19 AM > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: Re: MZ-6? > >> > >>John Whittingham wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>Build quality?! > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>Quite possibly. > >> > >>Actually, now that you mention it, I noticed that the MZ-6 is > >>slightly lighter than the MZ-5n even though it's also somewhat > >>larger - if the figures on Bojdar Dimitrov's page are correct - so > >>maybe it's likely to be less solidly built. > >> > >> > >> > >>>John > >>>---------- Original Message ----------- > >>>From: Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>To: pdml <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>Sent: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 16:23:40 +0200 > >>>Subject: MZ-6? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>What are you people's opinion on the MZ-6? I found a new one with a > >>>>much-reduced price, so I'm a bit tempted... Seems to me that it's > >>>>rather similar to the MZ-5n, but its list price is lower, so there > >>>>must be something "missing", but what exactly is it? Actually, based > >>>>on the specs, it looks like the MZ-6 has something to offer that the > >>>>MZ-5n hasn't, in terms of program modes (not that I'm too interested > >>>>in those, but still...) > >>>> > >>>>- Toralf > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>------- End of Original Message ------- > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >------- End of Original Message ------- > > > > > > ------- End of Original Message -------
