Oh shutup Pal, Not only many of us, but other camera reviewers don't agree with you. We know how it isn't your favorite camera, and how you detested the AF with 400mm lenses trying to shoot flocks of moving birds. Did you ever take a photo with it you liked???
You also don't seem to be overly enamored with your 645 (film flatness issues) and I seem to recall some "disappointment" expressed over the MZ-S. There's no perfect camera out there that will transform itself to one's whims of the moment. They are all tools and the PZ-1p is a very very good one. The fact it didn't do well may be part marketing, part Nikon/Canon mentality of the consumer-masses. Tom C. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 12:51 PM Subject: Re: PZ-1p review > Robert wrote: > > > > I personally love the PZ-1p and can't really imagine a better all-around > > camera. > > > Since there has been so much praise of the Z-1p someone (me) should really elaborate on the opposite point of view; what a detestable, plasticky and directionless, ugly machine it really is. This view is also supported in its lack of popularity and the fact that it never sold in spite Pentax attempts to give it away. I sold mine and haven't regretted it for a moment. The Z-1p, indeed the whole Z-series, is the least Pentaxy of all Pentaxes ever. > > > >he ergonomics, as has already been pointed out, couldn't be > > better. > > It could and it is. All manufacturers, including Pentax, have abandoned this type of interface once and for all. Pressing a button while turning a dial while reading out the values at an LCD panel while turning another dial elsewhere on the camera body, all simultaneously is my recipe of a nightmare interface. By all means, if you use the Z-1p in program mode and seldomly acess the other features and functions, the interface is all right - and I guess this how the camera is supposed to be used with power-zoom and all. > > > The feel of the camera in my hands is simply the best thing I've > > ever felt. > > It doesn't fit my hand at all. My hands are far too large for the grip. It is the most uncomfortable camera I've ever handled. Its also a crude machine prone to vibrations and a twinting action from the film transport. It certainly not for connoisseurs of fine crafted machinery. > > > > The Hyper modes concept is a brilliant one - something that > > would be difficult now for me to lose. > > > But the camera could never manage the simultaneously avaiable aperture priority and manual mode present on the MZ-S. Try the Z-1p's brilliant interface, involving pressing a button, turning a wheel scrolling through a meny, while turning another wheel while reading out the desired values in an external LCD panel, in the middle of an action shooting session - when you suddenly want manual control. > > > I was one of the handful clamoring for a PZ-1pn as a new flagship...not that > > an update was needed for me, but simply for marketing reasons - a few > > upgrades such as multi-point autofocusing would have helped sales perhaps. > > (Let's not get into the discussion of how poorly this gem of a camera, the > > PZ-1p, has been marketed.) And a weather-sealed titanium PZ-1p would have > > made me happy for life. > > The Z-1p was a lost opportunity spoiled by Pentax marketing division. They crippled it into a compromise that triggered the very few and that didn't give any reason for not buying a Canon instead. > By removing it's very rugged built quality and weather sealing, by compromising the new lens series with hopeless gimmicks like power-zoom, features that didn't bring any customers and whose only effect was making the products more expensive and less competitive, Pentax turned a genuing EOS-1 competitor into a anonymous camera totally lost in the market place. Not only did they give the camera an absurdly amorphous, anonymous outer design, the also added to the insult and lack of sex appeal by using cheap plastic. Can you imagine what something like the MZ-S would have done in 1992 even with SAFOX II? > The outer design looks like contemporary japanes car design which is universally regarded as utterly soul less - thats why cars like the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord is impossible to sell outside Japan and north America. I'm sure that the Z-1p was designed by the same guy who designed the old, early 90's Mazda 626; both look like something originally vaguely stylish left too long out in the sun so that they start to melt. > In the early 90's who wanted a amourphous blob of a camera, similarly priced to the premium Nikon F90, with a non-existing system of lenses (very few lenses were available), and those lenses that did exist were over-priced due to unwanted features like power-zoom, when they could buy the mentioned Nikon with its heritage or a Canon with its USM lenses? The only one were those owning older, maual focus Pentax lenses. Unfortunately, the Z-1p was never very popular among most users of older Pentaxes that after all were often bought for their built quality and clean design without gimmicks. > Eventually, Pentax dumped the Z-1p and attracted cheap customers who only were willing to consider a Pentax if costed less than the competition. No good for brand building. No wonder Pentax felt the need to start making Limited lenses. > > > > It's hard for me see how the PZ-1p is considered ugly - especially when set > > alongside the MZ-S. > > Allow me to question your sense of estetics. The MZ-S can be labeled a designer camera whereas the Z-1p best goes umnetioned. > > > > Sadly, the PZ-1p wasn't even loved by Pentaxers in general - and certainly > > not the way LX was. The demise of the LX was honored with a long thread of > > lavish toasts; the PZ-1p died without such honor. When I heard the news > > that the PZ-1p was officially out of production, I, however, silently drank > > some homemade chianti. > > > Some of us actually celebrated the demise of the Z-1p whose only purpose was getting features at a cheap price. It also contributed to the cheapness of the Pentax brand and its lack of popularity. Thank God for the MZ-5n and the MZ-S; They may not be anybodys cup of tea but their existence owes to more than simply offering value for money. > > > Pål - 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 .
