No, like all AF bodies it's battery dependant (As is the F100 I compare it too). If you're looking for a body that can function without batteries, the equally pricey LX is the most desirable (and is priced similarly against the Nikon F3 as the MZ-S is to the F100. The LX is much closer in performance to the F3 than the MZ-S is to the F100 though, in fact the F3 and LX are pretty much identical in capabilities, with the LX having slightly better metering and the F3 having a faster MD).
-Adam On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 3:51 PM, Michael S. Keller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can the MZ-S operate with no juice, as my dearly-departed KX and K1000 > could? > > > Adam Maas wrote: > > Overall, even if you want to still shoot film the lack of new film > > bodies isn't a big issue. There's a superb selection of used film > > bodies on the market today at far more reasonable prices than the new > > bodies ever sold for (although the really desirable Pentax bodies are > > rather overpriced in comparison to anything short of a Leica R or > > Contax, it pains me that a Nikon F100 can be had for half the cost of > > an MZ-S). > > > > If you're worried about parts, buy a spare or two. > > > -- > > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.