Nature photographer using *istD
Hello. Just came across this site; the guy who owns it is a nature photographer, who mentions the *istD and Pentax glass as his gear. Some of his stuff is amazing. Those of you exclusively interested in image aesthetics may wonder why he has some technically below-par photos on his site. In it might interest you to know that in those cases the shown subjects are incredibly hard to photograph (his series of Goshawk shots comes to mind. Impossible bird to photograph, normally), which in nature photography can be a valid argument IMHO. Aopart from that he uses some really heavy compression, I assume to prevent image piracy. The site is in Dutch, but just click on random hyperlinks; it's not a hard site to navigate. http://home.versatel.nl/mcj.schaap/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.1 - Release Date: 09/03/05
Re: Novoflex tele lenses
At 20:53 17/01/05, Carlos wrote: You say you use your 600/8 with a 1.7x converter. Is that combo as difficult to focus as it may seem? Surprisingly, not at all, provided of course the weather isn't too bad. I still can't figure out why the Novoflex (even with converter) is easier to focus than my 600/8 Sigma mirror lens. I'm not just talking about the rapidity of focus... even when I'm shooting the proverbial sitting duck the mirror lens just projects a darker image on the focusing screen compared to the "rocket launcher". Of course, both don't work very well with screens that incorporate any focusing aids. Zed.
Re: Novoflex tele lenses
Hi Carlos, I use a Novoflex f8/600, basically as my main lens since lately I've been shooting little else than birds. As mentioned by others, center sharpness and contrast are excellent, but in the corners there's something to be desired. Also, when used on newer Pentax bodies, expect a lot of vignetting in the corners (which according to the Novoflex literature is caused by the narrow light path of the small pentax bodies). However, with an *istD this might not be much of an issue. Unless you work from a hide or photograph birds that are relatively tame, 600 mm still isn't a very long lens. I routinely put a 1.7x converter behind it, and even then I normally do get rather small birds on big slides ;-). However, I mainly do raptors, and they are among the more shy of the bird realm. As a consequence, I also have to use rather fast film, so most of my shots end up rather grainy. I like that, but it isn't exactly be publication quality. Again, with an *istD you circumvent that problem, I'd imagine. You might want to have a look at this: http://www.birdpix.nl/album_search.php?search_type=username&search=Karel The recent pictures in this guy's album were shot with a canon 300D and a Novoflex/Leitz 560 mm head. Not entirely comparable, I know, but perhaps it gives some idea. You might be able to filter his technical data out of the Dutch comments. Novoflex lenses are best suited to use with a shoulder mount and perhaps a bean bag. The optional tripod collar can only be mounted near the lens' center of gravity, which leaves quite some room for vibration on even the heaviest of tripods. The old novoflex shoulder stock is, however, the finest shoulder mount I've ever used. Brilliant design. A huge advantage of the old Novoflex heads is the price...check German eBay, they are quite common there. You should be able to get a fully functional kit for only a few hundred dollars. They weigh about 2.5 kilograms, so shipping costs should be manageable. Hope this helps, Z. At 22:37 16/01/05, you wrote: Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:25:43 +0100 From: Carlos Royo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pentax-discuss@pdml.net" Subject: Novoflex tele lenses Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As some people around here are much more knowledgeable than me about long lenses, I would like to know their thoughts about the performance of the follow focus tele lenses made by Novoflex. I have only used a Sigma 400 5.6 AF, which I sold to a list member years ago, and the excellent F* 300 mm. 4.5 I still keep the F* 300 mm. but it is a short lens for birding and other kind of nature photography. If I ever get an *istD or other Pentax DSLR, perhaps the crop factor will allow a narrower FOV, but I will surely need a longer lens. Carlos
Re: OT:strange error messages from the postmaster for successful postings
FWIW, I also got an error mail like that, even though the message it was referring to made it to the list (or at least to the archives, I find it easier to read this list on the archive website). Zed Markus Maurer wrote Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:39:42 -0800 after my last dozen messages went successful onto the list - I saw them and got answers - I get an error email for most of them now with the following text: -
Re: A pair of birds
Just to solve the species ID: the pictured birds are Ring-necked Parakeets, Psittacula krameri. Indeed they are an introduced species, that is rapidly becoming a very familiar sight in most of the major cities in Western Europe (recent counts here in Holland yielded figures of about 1800 for Amsterdam and 3200 for The Hague). Numbers in especially Paris and London are substantially larger, I think. Closest natural population is in southern Turkey. They are completely resilient to our winters and breed prolifically. They are quite a cheerful addition to the city (I have flocks of hundreds of them flying by each morning and evening; they sometimes come to my balcony to dine on seeds of my plants - I had to remove a thornapple otherwise I might have had dead parakeets there)if it weren't for the fact that they are quite aggressive and squat woodpecker nesting holes (spotted woodpeckers are becoming a rarity in the city). The recent advent of large bird-eating birds of prey (Goshawk and peregrin falcon) as breeding species in Amsterdam may limit their numbers in the future though. If similar things happen in the other cities, who knows, things may turn out to be manageable. Anyway, someone asked for the scientific name of the European Roller: Coracias garrulus. A picture may be found here: http://www.birdpix.nl/album_page.php?pic_id=6784 Hope this helps, Z.
Re: seeking recommendations for a good 300mm prime
On the misguided guess we might not have a disclosure rule? Oops, apologies, hope you weren't intending on bidding on that. I should go stand in the corner and read some list FAQs. Z. Just out of curiosity, on what exactly are you basing your hopes? Kostas
Re: seeking recommendations for a good 300mm prime
Hope I'm not breaking some auction disclosure rule here, but have a look at this one: http://cgi.ebay.nl/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30070&item=3852615056&rd=1&ssPageName=WD2V , a fast (f/2.8) Tamron with adapt-all mount and novoflex focusing grip. Might be an interesting option; fast enough to add a teleconverter if needed. I do agree with others who mentioned a 300 mm is rather short for bird photography. It might suffice if you limit yourself to birds without shyness issues (gulls are great), or have access to a good hide. But on hiking trips with a major serendipity factor I find that I basically constantly have to leave my 1.7 x converter on my novoflex 600 mm in order to get half-decent shots. But then again I mainly do birds of prey, which tend to stay as far away as possible. Z. At 07:15 17/11/04, you wrote: - Original Message - From: "Amita Guha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 8:50 PM Subject: seeking recommendations for a good 300mm prime > I had a chance to shoot some birds on Cape Cod last week, and - surprise! - > my old Sigma 70-300mm was just as crappy at bird shots as it was the last > time I tried it. ;) So I decided to come home and just run down to B&H and > buy the FA 300mm f/4.5. But now I can't find it on the website at all. It's > not even listed as backordered; it's just not there. Does anyone know if > this lens is being discontinued? And if it is, does anyone have one they'd > like to sell me? :) > > Failing that, can anyone recommend a good third-party lens? I just want a > reasonably fast lens that I can hike with and that has some nice contrast. > An f/4.5 would be fine. > > Does anyone know what the deal is with Pentax? There are a couple of other > lenses I'm interested in that aren't available. Are they slowing down > production or shifting everything over to consumer digicams? > > Amita > --
Re: Reverse mount question
Thanks for the replies, guys. I now go kick myself for not realising in the first place that it would only affect the infinity focusing...d'oh!
Reverse mount question
Hello, I'm planning to do some macro experimenting with a reverse-mounted lens. I noticed the adapters are available in 52 and 49 mm diameter versions. If I get the 52 mm version, would I be able to use 49 mm lenses with a filter step-up ring, or would the lens-to-film distance be wrong then (this probably seems a silly question to many, but I really have no clue how all this works). TIA, Z.
Re: Tangentially ... (Gas Guzzlers)
I'm not hindered by any actual knowledge here, but don't fighters generally fly faster than the speed of sound, where (some) airliners only rarely do that? Crossing the sound barrier gives that nasty "boom", which adds to their loudness, I'd think. D. Glenn Arthur Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote Which reminds me ... Are fighters actually much louder than jetliners, or is it just that when they pass over my house they do so at a much lower altitude than jetliners do?
Re: Waves of Cranes
OK, normally I stay out of these PAW/PESO discussions as I don't feel I'm qualified to comment in most cases, but simply because the main topic of this one is related to mine (birds) I had a look Dang! This is a stunning shot. What stands out most (to me, at least) is how the formation of the cranes echoes the shape of the mountain (hills maybe, but I live in Holland, so everything over 3 ft is a mountain to me) ridge. It's almost like there's a progressive wave moving upwards in the picture... I expect the cranes on the right-hand side of the frame to start moving upwards at any time, to follow the shape of the mountain peak below them. This makes the shot really dynamic. Anyway, kudos! Z.
Re: Use of the word 'classic'.
Don't know about the formal definition, but some advertising lines
certainly are instant classics ;-). I'm still recovering from the
"Official digital camera of the Internet" slogan in that other thread (and,
in fact, wonder whether Al Gore approved of that statement - given he's the
Inventor Of The Internet, right? ;-)).
Classic is probably going the way of "vintage" ("wine year", now pretty
much meaning "used crap") and "collector's item" (surely, if people collect
beer bottle caps or desiccated flies, there must my someone out there who
will regard my particular piece of junk as an item worthy of collecting?).
Ah well.
Malcolm Smith wrote:
When I think of the word 'classic' in connection with cameras, I immediately
think of anything M42 or perhaps K2s & other early bayonette fitting
equipment. I was quite surprised in the 16.10.04 edition of Amateur
Photographer for an advert (pg5 for those interested) promoting their own
classified section to see a Canon D60 referred to as a classic digital
camera. They've only been out a few minutes in camera years! Should I look
forward to new classic in a box status, when buying a digital SLR? It's
taken film cameras years to be classics, but at this rate, my *ist D will be
one by, er, next year.
Malcolm
tus
Re: FA 35mm f/2 European prices please
Best I could find (in NL) tonight was 325 incl. VAT at www.geengeld.nl. In comparison, it's 381 at the normally very cheap www.kamera-express.nl. Z.
Re: MZ-S discontinued?
FWIW, I just checked Pentax' Dutch website, and there film SLRs are now not even mentioned anymore, except for the "product archive" section. The Dutch distributor's current price list only features the MZ-M, MZ-60 and *ist, and something tells me that's just while stocks last. In contrast, the *ist DS is now prominently featured on the site(and available in shops), with a MSRP of 999 incl. VAT. I don't know if the Dutch market is in any way representative for the rest of the world, but if so, I guess this suggests that Pentax has declared not just the MZ-S, but in fact all 35 mm film cameras, things of the past (as predicted before by others on this list). Bummer. Z.
Re: Question about shutter release cables
Heheh, I should have read ahead before replying to Mike. Thanks for the replies, guys. Michel, that's an excellent guide you put up there (and a good excuse for me to brush up on my French ;-))! Z. At 19:18 13/10/04, Emiliano wrote: - I molded a plug for my ZX-50 with 2-component epoxy glue. I encapsulated inside three small gold female connectors that mate with the connectors in the camera. With a smal file I shaped the epoxy block to fit. It has been working for a couple of years now. That's how I connect the my camera to the focus and shutter release buttons of my underwater camera housing. You can make adaptors or cables for almost nothing this way. and then Michel wrote: My (french) solution: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/trucs/telecommandes.htm
Re: Question about shutter release cables
Mike wrote: And rather unlucky. If you find an "adaptor" for any of the (as far as I can find out) custom Pentax fittings, be sure to let the list know. There are rather a lot of us who will be wanting to do the same. Which is why Pentax has made them themselves Well, there may be hope here. The little 4-pin data cable for a 3.5" floppy disc drive in a computer works perfectly for the SFX. Just remove the connector's contact pins, cut off one of the outer guide routes of the connector, and re-insert the contact pins in the resulting 3-path plug. Solder the three leads to the corresponding positions on a female 2.5 mm stereo jack, and plug the MZ-6's relase cord plug into that. Et voila, you have a cheap-ass adapter. Of course, this way the new plug for the SFX doesn't lock in place, but the amount of friction is high enough to keep the thing firmly in place (and low enough as not to damage the connector pins on the camera). You can opt to leave it permanently in place and just plug in the release cord when necessary. For more complex plugs, a simple way to make your own is by simply slipping mini connectors (again, from some cheap multi-pin computer cable) over their contact points on the camera (or whatever, I used this technique in a neurophysiology lab and have also applied it to '60 musical instruments with weird connectors) and then glue the wires together in situ. I prefer to use dental acrylic, but when unavailable some two-component synthetic resin works just fine. Of course, you'll have to make sure the glue doesn't permanently affix the wires to the camera, but using a little grease or plastic foil between the contact surfaces works miracles. Z. > So, I was wondering... does anyone here know (and is willing to share that > knowledge ;-)) if ALL pentax electric able release switches operate on this > same priciple? Because if so, I can simply make plug adapters for the > different systems, and use the MZ-6's cable to operate all cameras. I'd be > happy to put the "how-to" drawings on the web somewhere. > > And yes, I'm cheap ;-).
Question about shutter release cables
Hello. A while ago I bought a shutter release cable switch for my MZ-6 (ZX-L), because when working with hand-held long lenses, I usually need both hands for focussing and camera support, and consequently lack a limb to press the shutter button. When I received the switch, I felt a bit cheated for paying 42 (which was a bargain; most shops here ask about 70) for what essentially is a walkman headphone cord with a button that shorts the three leads together; short one lead to mass and the thing focusses/calculates the exposure, short the third lead to the other two and the thing trips the shutter. I probably could have fabricated one myself for 2 or so. Now, I don't mind paying top money for decent stuff, but this mark-up is ridiculous IMHO. Now of course, Pentax uses a different cable release for nearly each model. This one has a mini stereo jack, and only one or two other cameras (the *ist and another, I think) accept this plug. However, I also have an SFX and two winder-equipped M-series cameras that all use a three-pole cable release (with two different plugs, of course). I have already tried tripping the shutter on the SFX by touching the poles of the cable switch socket with jeweller's forceps, and yes, it works. So, I was wondering... does anyone here know (and is willing to share that knowledge ;-)) if ALL pentax electric able release switches operate on this same priciple? Because if so, I can simply make plug adapters for the different systems, and use the MZ-6's cable to operate all cameras. I'd be happy to put the "how-to" drawings on the web somewhere. And yes, I'm cheap ;-). TIA, Z.
Re: Free Market Photography? (was: Re: No more photography in Europe?)
Cotty wrote:
There are police snatch squads patrolling popular tourist venues like
Trafalgar Square in London, on the lookout for - literally - dirty old
men with cameras. They watch for men who photograph children, monitor
their activities, and move in and arrest where necessary (to them).
Hmm, reminds me of my little reptile photography trip to the
Slovene/Croatian cost. Local friends had assured me snakes were quite
abundant there, and indeed after about an hour of searching I found a
freshly shed skin of a large specimen near the parking lot of a
children's holiday camp. Now, when out in the field, I tend to carry a 600
mm for bird photography and shorter telephoto lenses for reptiles. After
several hours of searching in that area, it hit me what would happen if
someone saw a single adult man lurking around in the bushes around a
children's camp, carrying two long lenses. I bolted out of there
immediately ("Sure, you were photographing SNAKES, sir. You can admire some
snakes in prison while we process your film.").
Bizarre thing is that several hundred meters down the road, I found a pair
of snakes at a construction site near the road. I decided to look around
there, because the place was obviously really quiet... The presence of
marijuana ciggy butts and a collection of smutty magazines lying about gave
me that impression. THEN it hit me what would happen if the guy who was
spotted carrying long lenses around a children's camp was now discovered at
an abandoned site with smutty magazines and reefer... Nature photography
has its drawbacks. Ah well, at least I got to photograph the snakes.
As far as the legislation goes... I'm no lawyer (nor do I play one on TV),
but my guess is (like others already suggested) that this new European
ruling means that judges will get to play a larger role to decide on
case-by-case basis. If someone takes my picture on the street and I take
them to court over that, the judge will probably laugh at me (before fining
me for wasting time), UNLESS I can make a case my privacy has been
seriously compromised. IF I can make such a case, the judge may rule
differently. My guess is that this ruling will serve as a handle to prevent
stalking excesses (whether it involves celebs, children, former lovers,
whatever; any case were some maniac decides to follow you around with a
camera all day every day) more than some Draconian measure to ban people
from taking each other's photographs. I guess we'll have to see how
jurisprudence develops.
Z.
Re: Buying Lens in Holland
FWIW, I live in Amsterdam and from experience I can say it's not the easiest place to buy new Pentax gear. Even the "official Pentax specialist", a shop named Esser, generally has little in stock and sells at or near the importer's recommended retail price. For new gear, I concur with others who have recommended kamera-express.nl. There are a few nice second-hand places that you might want to visit though, most notably in the Haarlemmerstraat just west of Central Station. The city of Utrecht (less than half an hour from Amsterdam by car or train) has some excellent shops as well. I don't know where you're located, but I'm under the impression photo gear tends to be a lot more expensive in Europe than in North America. Not just photo gear, FTM... when it comes to musical instruments, we usually pay around double the US prices (even when the instruments are manufactured here). Zed
Re: ZX-l (pentax-discuss-d Digest V04 #212)
Well, AFAIK it's an MZ-6 with a data back. So, if you disregard the data back, this recent thread might be useful: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg198866.html Hope this helps, Z. At 16:27 02/09/04, you wrote: -- Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 10:15:49 -0400 From: "Christien Bunting" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pentax-discuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: zx-l Does anyone have any views on this Camera?
Re: MZ-6? (Re: pentax-discuss-d Digest V04 #121)
Thanks for the warm welcome, all ;-). Kostas wrote: OK, forgive me if stating the obvious here. By all means. I've always wondered why the Litany of All Saints doesn't contain a Patron Saint of the Obvious (Saint Dûh!, for instance). We need one. At least I do, more often than I actually care to admit. Do you know that you can autofocus, keep the shutter half-pressed and then adjust the composition to your liking; the area that was in focus initially will stay in focus even if not in the centre of the picture anymore. Yeah, I figured that out later ;-). But thanks anyway, this would typically be something I would miss and just find out when I retire the camera. During that same holiday in Slovenia (where I shot the lizards), I ran into a snake (Coluber viridiflavus carbonarius, the Balkan race of the Yellow-Green Racer, for sake of logic lacking any yellow or green on its jet-black body). A big basking female that had just shed her skin, giving her a nice and shiny appearance (http://uk.f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/the_dude_in_the_suit/detail?.dir=/e4f3&.dnm=534d.jpg). As is obvious from the picture, there was an annoying little piece of grass in my field of vision, and of course the camera kept focusing on it. I realised that by repeatedly depressing the shutter control, the camera went looking for alternatives to focus on, and when I held the thing it stayed in focus. Yay! (Subsequently I learnt why these snakes are called "racers" in English, so it was the only shot I could take. Their Dutch name translates to "wrath snakes", which doesn't really prepare one for a snake darting AWAY from you with lightning speed. Ridiculous name.). Don't worry, I have since read the camera manual ;-). [Alternatingly, either Toralf or I wrote something: [snipped and edited for sake of more confusion] Now, then... The pictures you point to below aren't that bad at all, especially for a non-photographer. (Now, I hope you weren't fishing for compliments here...) Heheh. You should see the other 99% of my photos. Those would clarify my comments to an extent that would make me want to hide from the world forever. (Re: viewfiender) Really? Are you also comfortable with the size of the viewfinder image? I mean, the magnification factor is quite a bit lower than on the MX/ME cameras, as far as I know. It is indeed, and it's really noticeable in an A/B comparison. I don't find it problematic in any way though (though I have good eyesight, maybe that's an issue). For tripod work, I tend to use a Refconverter with a 2x magnification option, allowing me to focus a bit more critically. However, I rarely use a tripod (boring wader bird shots, mostly), as I'm fairly lazy and don't want to carry around too much stuff. Anyway, I think it depends a lot on personal taste and requirements. Currently, I mostly do shots of birds in flight, and the low-magnification viewfinder makes it a bit easier to lock on a peregrine falcon dive-bombing a pigeon, so to say ;-). Also, how about the camera controls? Some say they are somewhat counter-intuitive. Hmm... hard to say. If I were king of the world, each camera would simply come with three controls: [1] on/off, [2] sunny/cloudy, [3] broken. Obviously, the third button is only for the professional user who knows to leave it alone. Ah..my faithful Agfa Click-y! But yeah, some controls are in strange places for someone (like me) who has only used M-series bodies before. I rely on exposure overruling a lot (moving small dots in bright blue skies tend to lead to underexposure), and where on the MX I'd simply set the shutter speed "wrong" and on the ME-F I'd turn the correction ring, on the ME-F I have to push a button, then tap on a lever several times and by the time I'm ready the bird is gone. Alternatively, I can just rapidly measure light on a tree, a building or whatever resembles the colors and contrasts of the bird most, push the exposure lock, and then take a picture. That actually works a lot faster and more accurate than overexposing by estimation alone. But anyway, I don't have any experience with more advanced (i.e., not present on M-series) functions on other cameras, so I can't really make a fair comparison. All I can say is that it took me little time to work and understand them, and when I switch to the MX or ME-F I don't have to do a "mental re-set" to operate their controls intuitively. Also, how easy (or hard) do you think it is to do various adjustments while looking through the viewfinder? Because there are so many functions (again, compared to an MX or ME-F), I do find that I prefer to look at the control when I make an initial "big" adjustment. It's perfectly possible to keep looking in the viewfinder while doing this (the settings appear in the viewfinder while one turns the knob), but it just feels a bit silly. And how about the visibility of the viewfinder (Aperture/Exposure time) display? On my PZ-20, it's hard to read in brigh
Re: MZ-6?
Hello, After several weeks of newbie lurking, this seems a good moment to drop in (and introduce myself to the list while I go along). Anyway: I'm a complete technophobe who generally refuses to use anything made after ~1980, but last year I caved and bought an MZ-6. My main reason for buying it was the top shutter speed of 1/4000", which, combined with the clear viewfinder, the possibility of manually overruling the DX-code and the backward-compatibility with my old Pentax lenses made it very suitable -on paper- for photographing birds in flight with long telephoto lenses without the use of a tripod. I had been eying up the MZ-3 for exactly those purposes, but when the MZ-6 came out for a fraction of the price of the MZ-3, the decision to buy a "modern monstrosity" became a lot easier to make. I had never used an autofocus camera before; my equipment until then consisted of an MX (inherited from my dad who bought it new the day it came out) and a host of second (third, fourth, nth) -hand ME/MEsuper/ME-F bodies, which usually crapped out on me after a year-or-so of use. The MX, of course, still works as fine as it did the day my dad bought it. Now, for all intents and purposes, I'm an extremely bad photographer. Really, I'm complete crap. I don't consider myself a photographer at all, FTM. I'm a biologist with a fascination for certain animals, and the whole reason why I took up photography again is to shoot critter pix. Click away, just hope the eye of the animal is more or less in focus, crop afterwards to correct the "composition" of the image (yeah, I know more advanced people actually do that in the viewfinder BEFORE taking the picture ;-)). However, increased contact with a Nikon-F3-HP-toting semi-professional photographer neighbour recently inspired me to actually go develop my photography skills, which is also a main reason for me to join this list. Apologies for the verbosity, but now you know where I come from...don't expect high-quality technical comments from me, I'll probably be lurking-and-learning mostly ;-). Right, back to the MZ-6. Overall, I'm severely impressed by this thing. I've had it for slightly over a year now, and it has become my main body. Although I had never heard of the term "pentamirror" before it came up on this list a few weeks ago, for shooting with f=600/8 (or worse) lenses the MZ-6's viewfinder and focusing screen give me a lot of extra clarity compared to the MX (with standard focusing screen, I don't have a clear one) and the ME-F. I find I can actually focus now, where focusing on the matte parts of the M-series screens was a major pain (forget the focusing aids, they just go black). (Of course, when using faster, shorter lenses and slow-moving "targets", nothing beats the focusing aids in the MX's screen + viewfinder, but that's beside the point for my purposes.) As far as the AF goes...well, we simply don't get along. The MZ-6 was a package deal with a Pentax FA SMC 35-80 1:4-5.6 and a Tamron 80-210 1:4.5-5.6 autofocus zoom. Even when I close the aperture a bit to get an increased depth-of-field, I find that I have a difference of opinion with the AF about what is considered "in focus"... the results are invariably better when I use the camera and those lenses in MF mode (which I do, 90% of the time). This has annoyed me at various instances where the lighting conditions weren't too great (so I can't increase the depth of field without risking motion blur) take this photo for instance (http://uk.f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/the_dude_in_the_suit/detail?.dir=/e4f3&.dnm=622b.jpg). This shot was taken with the Tamron, at f=210/5.6. The eye of the lizard (Eastern Emerald Lizard, Lacerta viridis, male, in northern Slovenia) is just out-of-focus, while the parasites (ticks, I gather) on his shoulder are IN focus, probably because they are in the center of the frame. I don't know if this is typical for AF in general or just for the MZ-6 (or my flawed technique, FTM... I took this shot within a month after buying the camera), but these days I wouldn't take a shot like that with AF. Sometimes the AF does work quite well though, as this pic demonstrates (http://uk.f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/the_dude_in_the_suit/detail?.dir=/e4f3&.dnm=ab1b.jpg)... taken during the same shoot, the female that was living with the male pictured before. About the other features of the camera as said, this is my only AF ever, so I cannot compare it to the MZ-5n or MZ-3. The picture functions work quite well, but to be honest it's just as easy to override them if you have time. Just for quick snapshots (the "share with friends and relatives" type) it's useful. I like the fact that the camera can operate as manually as you want it to ...it does a fair impression of an MX that way (although of course it will never work without a power supply, which I still find the best trait of the MX). It has a number of "Pentax functions" that
