Yes and no... If the sensor had been any good, Pentax would have been way ahead with a 24x36 digital SLR right from the start.
BUT... Let's face it, the user interface of the MZ-S isn't nearly as good as that of the PZ-1, 1p, ist D, K10, etc. For some reason they had forgotten about the two-wheel, green-button (IF button on the Z's), HyperProgram system. Unfortunately, Pentax was =very= slow to recover from the MZ-D debacle, and when it did the result was the istD--a competent camera, but a placeholder while waiting for the K series (and =where= did they scrape that name from??). Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW --- On Sun, 10/17/10, Steven Desjardins <drd1...@gmail.com> wrote: > BTW, I always wondered how things > might have gone if that sensor > hadn't been such a bust (or they had chosen another sensor) > and this > camera had been produced. I can hardly blame Pentax > for not making it > since the company that went ahead with their version > (Contax) has a > horrible failure on their hands. > > On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Steven Desjardins <drd1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > That's what I meant, although I did say it badly. I > meant we could > > have had the same ergonomics in both cameras since the > MZ-S and grip > > was basis the Pentax digital camera with the Phillips > 6 MP FF sensor. > > Here are lots of pics fro those who weren't looking at > Pentax 9 years > > ago: > > > > According to Wikipedia (which is never wrong) the film > version did come first: > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentax_MZ-D > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentax_MZ-S > > > > One look at the MZ-D prototype clearly shows its > common basis with the MZ-S: > > > > http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/bodies/prototypes/MZ-D.html > > http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/bodies/film_MZ-ZX/mzzxS.html > > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0102/01021106pentaxdigitalslr.asp > > > > Amusingly, I began to try to find the MZ-S review in > dpreview before I > > realized how truly dumb that was. > > > > On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 2:40 PM, John Francis <jo...@panix.com> > wrote: > >> On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 01:08:48PM +0000, drd1...@gmail.com > wrote: > >>> The funny thing is that the MZ-S was supposed > to be a digital camera. > >> > >> No - the MZ-S was supposed to be the > top-of-the-MZ-line Pentax film body. > >> > >> I presume you're thinking of the first planned > Pentax digital camera > >> (often referred to as the MZ-D), which would have > shared much of the > >> ergonomics and appearance of the MZ-S. But > suggesting that this was > >> driving the design, and the MZ-S was just a > film-based offshoot, is > >> questionable at best. > >> > >> I always loved the feel of the MZS with the grip. > Sadly, I finally sold mine to buy the K-7. > >> > >> If an MZ-S with grip can fetch anything close to > $1000, I may well be > >> selling mine to get a K-5. I've still got a PZ-1p > (and a couple of MXs) > >> should I ever feel the urge to shoot film again. > I prefer the control > >> style of the PZ bodies (which matches the digital > bodies, too) to that > >> of the MZ bodies. > >> > >> -- > >> 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. > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Steve Desjardins > > > > > > -- > Steve Desjardins > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
