I agree. Unless Pentax makes a really dumb choice, you're gonna need a big battery pack. I don't think the smaller sensor makes that much of a difference.
Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/28/02 01:47PM >>> At 05:09 PM 10/28/02 +0000, you wrote: >The prosumer £2000 models seem to be more 'normal' sized SLRs without >the bulky vertical grip assembly below the lens. The MZ-D had an >integral grip like having the BG-10 permanently attached. I don't think >this makes sense for a cheaper version aimed at non-pros who don't want >a bulky camera. I concur totally with Pal here. The MZ-S is already significantly smaller than many of the prosumer models: MZ-S - 136.5 x 95.0 x 64.0mm (5.4 x 3.7 x 2.5 in) EOS-3 (film) - 161 x 119.2 x 70.8 mm (6.3 x 4.7 x 2.8 in. ) D100 - 144 x 116 x 81 mm (5.7 x 4.6 x 3.2 in) Canon D60 - 150 x 107 x 75 mm (5.9 x 4.2 x 3.0 in) Sigma SD9 - 152 x 120 x 79 mm (6 x 4.7 x 3.1 in) Adding the built-in grip/battery pack to the bottom of the MZ-S adds some to the height of the MZ-D, and maybe something to the depth (but the right hand grip on the MZ-S already sticks out pretty far), but I don't think it would be significantly bigger than any of the models listed above. The Nikon D100 takes a big battery pack, same for the D60. (Don't know if the Sigma has an external battery grip). Maybe the battery grip on the MZ-D will be optional, but I don't see them using a chassis that is smaller than the current MZ-S. --Mike
