Bruce wrote: > I still own, and like, Pentax MF gear. I find the current day Pentax Co., and their >AF line up, to be a combination of >idiosyncratic and lame.
Don't know about the lame part but it is definitely idiosyncratic. If anything, the MZ-S isn't idiosyncratic enough to make an impact. I think it's too much of an allrounder. Boosting its outdoor capabilities and it's mobility due to low weight in expense of some of it's all round features (built in flash comes to mind) would have made the package more convincing. It is a paradox that while the MZ-S has the best action type interface ever conceived; it makes an EOS-1 look downright antique, it only offers 2.5fps rate an no ultrasonic motor AF options. Theres no doubt that you don't choose Pentax for state of the art AF. Personally, I can see myeself using several brands in the future. I mostly use MF theses days and the only thing missing from making my 645 MF outfit complete is the 300/5.6 lens and a 1,4X converter. My whole MF outfit will then weight less than an F5 with three zoom lenses. For auroras and situation where low weight is important, I'll use LX or the MZ-S with mostly Limited lenses. This combination can't be beat by anything in the marketplace for this usages. For handholdable telephoto work, mostly from my boat, I'll buy the first 400/4 IS lens that will be released on the market regardless of brand (No. The Canon 400/4 IS DO lens doesn't apply because it quality is questionable and it cost the same as a 600/4). Pål
