RE: PZ-1p (Z-1p) Instruction Manual?
Thanks, Fernando and Bill. Wow, how did I forget to go to the ultimate source? It's nice that Pentax actually still has almost all the manuals available on its website, all the way back to H1. Not the best quality, but at least it's there and free. Yefei > > Go here: > http://www.pentaximaging.com/customer_care/manuals_literature/show_manual > The PZ1p is about halfway down. > > William Robb > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PZ-1p (Z-1p) Instruction Manual?
http://www.pentaximaging.com/customer_care/manuals_literature On 4/16/07, Yefei He <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, Folks, > >I recently acquired a used PZ-1p body. I expect to enjoy taking pictures > with it > for the days to come. It didn't come with an instruction manual, and I can't > seem to > find one on the web. So far I located a pdf version of the manual for PZ-1. > I suppose > they are close enough, but there must be some differences. Does anybody know > a site > where I can get an electronic version of the PZ-1p manual for free? I'm > aware I can > buy one, but I'm not ready to give up yet. > >Thanks! > >Yefei > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PZ-1p (Z-1p) Instruction Manual?
- Original Message - From: "Yefei He" Subject: PZ-1p (Z-1p) Instruction Manual? > Hello, Folks, > >I recently acquired a used PZ-1p body. I expect to enjoy taking > pictures > with it > for the days to come. It didn't come with an instruction manual, and I > can't > seem to > find one on the web. So far I located a pdf version of the manual for > PZ-1. > I suppose > they are close enough, but there must be some differences. Does anybody > know > a site > where I can get an electronic version of the PZ-1p manual for free? I'm > aware I can > buy one, but I'm not ready to give up yet. Go here: http://www.pentaximaging.com/customer_care/manuals_literature/show_manual The PZ1p is about halfway down. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: PZ-1p Function Card
Pz-1 function card is also out there... members.aol.com/rfsindg/PZ-1a.jpg and member.aol.com/rfsindg/PZ-1b.jpg Reagrds, Bob S. On 5/13/05, Trevor Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks Bob. > Just what I was looking for. > Hooroo. > Regards, Trevor. > Grafton, > Australia > > -Original Message- > From: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, 13 May 2005 2:06 PM > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Re: PZ-1p Function Card > > Also available here... > > members.aol.com/rfsindg/PZ-1pa.jpg > and > members.aol.com/rfsindg/PZ-1pb.jpg > > Regards, Bob S. > >
RE: PZ-1p Function Card
Thanks Michel. Hooroo. Regards, Trevor. Grafton, Australia -Original Message- From: Michel Carrère-Gée [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 12 May 2005 5:53 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: PZ-1p Function Card Michel Carrère-Gée a écrit : > Trevor Bailey a écrit : > >> G'day All. >> The PZ-1p that I bought a few weeks ago is working great. >> I really love the control layout of this body. >> The PZ-1p really leaves all other Pentax 35mm AF bodies that I have >> used in it's wake >> >> I would like to ask the list if anyone has a function card for the >> PZ-1p that they would want to sell? >> >> Or if not sell, would be able to scan it and email it to me. I have >> seen the scan that is available somewhere on the net, but it is not >> very clear and does not print well. >> >> >> > Download it on my web: > > ttp://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/Fichiers/z1p-pf-en.zip > > > !! http://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/Fichiers/z1p-pf-en.zip
RE: PZ-1p Function Card
Thanks Bob. Just what I was looking for. Hooroo. Regards, Trevor. Grafton, Australia -Original Message- From: Bob Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 13 May 2005 2:06 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: PZ-1p Function Card Also available here... members.aol.com/rfsindg/PZ-1pa.jpg and members.aol.com/rfsindg/PZ-1pb.jpg Regards, Bob S.
Re: PZ-1p Function Card
Also available here... members.aol.com/rfsindg/PZ-1pa.jpg and members.aol.com/rfsindg/PZ-1pb.jpg Regards, Bob S. On 5/12/05, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Someone, I forget who had a pdf version posted on the web. I used to > have a link to it but I lost all of those with the last few weeks of > computer hell. > > Trevor Bailey wrote: > > >G'day All. > >The PZ-1p that I bought a few weeks ago is working great. > >I really love the control layout of this body. > >The PZ-1p really leaves all other Pentax 35mm AF bodies that I have used > >in it's wake > > > >I would like to ask the list if anyone has a function card for the PZ-1p > >that they would want to sell? > > > >Or if not sell, would be able to scan it and email it to me. > >I have seen the scan that is available somewhere on the net, but it is > >not very clear and does not print well. > >Thanks to all. > > > >Hooroo. > >Regards, Trevor. > >Grafton, Australia > > > >"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands,hoist > >the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - Henry Louis Mencken > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > A man's only as old as the woman he feels. >--Groucho Marx > >
Re: PZ-1p Function Card
Someone, I forget who had a pdf version posted on the web. I used to have a link to it but I lost all of those with the last few weeks of computer hell. Trevor Bailey wrote: G'day All. The PZ-1p that I bought a few weeks ago is working great. I really love the control layout of this body. The PZ-1p really leaves all other Pentax 35mm AF bodies that I have used in it's wake I would like to ask the list if anyone has a function card for the PZ-1p that they would want to sell? Or if not sell, would be able to scan it and email it to me. I have seen the scan that is available somewhere on the net, but it is not very clear and does not print well. Thanks to all. Hooroo. Regards, Trevor. Grafton, Australia "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands,hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - Henry Louis Mencken -- A man's only as old as the woman he feels. --Groucho Marx
Re: PZ-1p Function Card
Michel Carrère-Gée a écrit : Trevor Bailey a écrit : G'day All. The PZ-1p that I bought a few weeks ago is working great. I really love the control layout of this body. The PZ-1p really leaves all other Pentax 35mm AF bodies that I have used in it's wake I would like to ask the list if anyone has a function card for the PZ-1p that they would want to sell? Or if not sell, would be able to scan it and email it to me. I have seen the scan that is available somewhere on the net, but it is not very clear and does not print well. Download it on my web: ttp://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/Fichiers/z1p-pf-en.zip !! http://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/Fichiers/z1p-pf-en.zip
Re: PZ-1p Function Card
Trevor Bailey a écrit : G'day All. The PZ-1p that I bought a few weeks ago is working great. I really love the control layout of this body. The PZ-1p really leaves all other Pentax 35mm AF bodies that I have used in it's wake I would like to ask the list if anyone has a function card for the PZ-1p that they would want to sell? Or if not sell, would be able to scan it and email it to me. I have seen the scan that is available somewhere on the net, but it is not very clear and does not print well. Download it on my web: ttp://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/Fichiers/z1p-pf-en.zip
Re: PZ-1p versus PZ-1
Yes. Lindamood, Mark wrote: I agree with Rick that the PZ-1p is the better of the two, for the same reasons -- easier flash compensation and more refined custom functions. The only PZ-1 I would get would be the groovy looking 75th anniversary silver/black, one of which went for a pretty reasonable price on ebay in the past month. Did anyone besides me notice those four FA primes appear and disappear at KEH in less than two days? -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: PZ-1p Grip Strap NIB FS
>I hate using ebay when a captive audience exists here. For sale, new in >box PZ-1p grip strap, $55.00 includes shipping. Several of you have >purchased fom me before. Hello, guys. I'm back. Mark
Re: PZ-1P Battery Grip
ERN wrote: >I wonder if it will also fit the PZ-1. I emailed them at the prototype stage and they said it would. There would be just a small cut-out where the PZ1p's panorama switch is. Now that the grip is finally available I a bit sorry I sold my Z1.
Re: PZ-1P
If he does not need the money, offer $300. The 28-80 is usually the kit lens which is crap by Pentax's standards. I have one from a used purchase and its noisy, got poor contrast/resolution, and it seems like there are bearings on the inside that sound like they're going to fall off any minute. Francis Alviar wrote: Hello to all, I have an opportunity to purchase a friend's PZ-1P. Since buying it he ran no more than 10 rolls through the camera. He says it's too complicated to use and prefers digital point and shoot cameras instead. Anyway, my question is: How much should I offer for the camera? Since he does not need the money (wife's a dentist), I've been leaning towards the $350-$400 range. One more question: How good is the 28-80mm lens that came with the camera? Thanks. Francis M. Alviar __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
Re: PZ-1p info?
Go to www.popphoto.com and look under their camera test archive. I think the PZ-1p was tested. DG At 10:30 AM 6/19/03 -0400, you wrote: I finally decided to order a PZ-1p from KEH to either replace or complement the PZ-1 I've been using for a while. I know most of the differences and I'll download the manual, but I also wanted to seek out some other sources of information to start learning the differences between the cameras. Does anyone know off-hand the date of the full Popular Photography hands-on review of the PZ-1p? I generally like their descriptive reviews, and in this case it would probably work well as they would be comparing it to the PZ-1 as the updated model. Also, any other sites or articles on the PZ-1p that would be useful? Also, I'll likely be selling the beautiful, like-new condition SFX I bought from Carlos Royo early this year to partially fund this purchase. I can offer it for sale with a selection of a lens or two, grip strap, and a few other accessories. I'll post a full description in a few days, but if you're interested, let me know. Joe -- Joe Wilensky Staff Writer Media & Technology Services 1150 Comstock Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853-2601 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: 607-255-1575 fax: 607-255-9873
RE: PZ-1P Problem with Rewind Mechanism
DX contacts are those reading the film speed, where you put the film cartridge in. regards, Alan Chan Thanks Alan. Pardon my ignorance but could you tell me where are the DX contacts? Are they the small little metal pieces at the top and bottom rolls of the film panel? _ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
RE: PZ-1P Problem with Rewind Mechanism
-Original Message- > From: Chee Seang Ong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Hi all, I am new to the list and I have a problem to ask > the experts on > the list :) > I was shooting a friend's wedding with my PZ-1P and > suddenly it started > to rewind all by itself, and I have just begun the roll > with just a few > shots! After a short while of rewinding sound being heard, > the display > screen showed the sign of the film fully rewind. I opened > up the film > cover and lo and behold the film was not rewinded at all! The only time I had this problem with a PZ-1p, it was because I misloaded, or possibly the film was kinked. The PZ-1p was pretty much bombproof in this, and most, regards. tv
RE: PZ-1P Problem with Rewind Mechanism
Thanks Alan. Pardon my ignorance but could you tell me where are the DX contacts? Are they the small little metal pieces at the top and bottom rolls of the film panel? cs -Original Message- From: Alan Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 3:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PZ-1P Problem with Rewind Mechanism Before you send it to repair, perhaps you might try to clean the DX contacts. It is a good idea to keep them clean. It happened to me once but never again. Don't know why. regards, Alan Chan >Hi all, I am new to the list and I have a problem to ask the experts on >the list :) I was shooting a friend's wedding with my PZ-1P and >suddenly it started to rewind all by itself, and I have just begun the >roll with just a few shots! After a short while of rewinding sound >being heard, the display screen showed the sign of the film fully >rewind. I opened up the film cover and lo and behold the film was not >rewinded at all! I closed the lid and the film forwarded one frame and >the display showed film no. 1! >I changed the battery but the same thing happened again. After I >switched it off for a while and re activated it again, everything worked >fine. It is still ok right now but I am sure same thing will happen >again if I'm gonna use it on another critical situation (Murphy's >Law)... >So, if anyone has the same experience I would really appreciate if you >can shed some light on the problem, how to fix it, where to send it for >repair and roughly how much it would cost. >Thank you! >CS _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: PZ-1P Problem with Rewind Mechanism
Before you send it to repair, perhaps you might try to clean the DX contacts. It is a good idea to keep them clean. It happened to me once but never again. Don't know why. regards, Alan Chan Hi all, I am new to the list and I have a problem to ask the experts on the list :) I was shooting a friend's wedding with my PZ-1P and suddenly it started to rewind all by itself, and I have just begun the roll with just a few shots! After a short while of rewinding sound being heard, the display screen showed the sign of the film fully rewind. I opened up the film cover and lo and behold the film was not rewinded at all! I closed the lid and the film forwarded one frame and the display showed film no. 1! I changed the battery but the same thing happened again. After I switched it off for a while and re activated it again, everything worked fine. It is still ok right now but I am sure same thing will happen again if I'm gonna use it on another critical situation (Murphy's Law)... So, if anyone has the same experience I would really appreciate if you can shed some light on the problem, how to fix it, where to send it for repair and roughly how much it would cost. Thank you! CS _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: PZ-1p
The PZ-1p is still listed as a current model on the Pentax USA website. http://www.pentax.com/products/cameras/ At 05:31 PM 3/5/2003 -0600, you wrote: Hi all I just picked up a PZ-1p on ebay and wondered what range of dates was this camera originally retailed by Pentax. This one is supposed to be never used except one roll to make sure it workedso it should be like new. But wondering how long it's likely been sitting around. Also wondering about High Speed flash...does this camera support that, and if so which flash unit would everyone recommend for this camera. I know it syncs at 250, but unsure about HS support. Actually I don't know if Pentaxes do that. Cheers Taz Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
Re: PZ-1p Follow up
Taz wrote: Hi all I just picked up a PZ-1p on ebay and wondered what range of dates was this camera originally retailed by Pentax. This one is supposed to be never used except one roll to make sure it workedso it should be like new. But wondering how long it's likely been sitting around. Also wondering about High Speed flash...does this camera support that, and if so which flash unit would everyone recommend for this camera. I know it syncs at 250, but unsure about HS support. Actually I don't know if Pentaxes do that. Check the date I told you. B&H was selling them until the middle of 2002 not 2001.. I got the last date they were made from Boz but I was thinking it was 2001 not 2000 -- Later, Gary
Re: PZ-1p
Taz wrote: Hi all I just picked up a PZ-1p on ebay and wondered what range of dates was this camera originally retailed by Pentax. This one is supposed to be never used except one roll to make sure it workedso it should be like new. But wondering how long it's likely been sitting around. Also wondering about High Speed flash...does this camera support that, and if so which flash unit would everyone recommend for this camera. I know it syncs at 250, but unsure about HS support. Actually I don't know if Pentaxes do that. The last year they were made was 2000 but there were some left in the stores into 2001. I know B&H was selling them until around the middle of 2001. As far as the HS flash, no the PZ-1p does not support that if I'm understanding what you're asking. The best flash to get for this body would be the AF-500FTZ. You'll NEVER regret it. Of course, if you plan on buying an MZ-S or the newer *ist film or digital, then I would suggest getting the AF-360-FGZ You can check out all the specs on Boz's website at: http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/ -- Later, Gary
Re: pz-1p focusing screen for mz-s
> are they interchangeable No idea > i have the grid one for the pz-1p and would love it on the mz-s Why? There is a grid screen for the MZ-S (cheap) and the MZ-S screens are much better than those for the Z-1p. Pål
Re: PZ-1p, PZ-20, 28-105, sigma 70-300
Tell more about the Sigma. Is it the APO version? Macro? Something older? One of them has one piece of LD glass another version has three. Don Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 - Original Message - From: "Bob Keefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pentax discuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 10:09 AM Subject: FS: PZ-1p, PZ-20, 28-105, sigma 70-300 > For sale: > > > PZ-1p body: Good user condition, everything works, no problems that I'm > aware of. Missing the (very loseable) little black thing that covers the > hotshoe. I've never missed it. Includes manual, body cap, and rather bunged > up original packaging. $295. > > PZ-20 body. A PZ-1 light, this camera was my introduction to autofocus. I > bought the PZ-1p soon after and kept the smaller one for backup. Works fine, > no problems. Includes body cap, manual and box. $95. > > Pentax FA 28-105 f4-5.6 power zoom. (58mm filter) Heavy, solid, wonderful > little lens. Excellent condition, immaculate optics. $175. > > Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 zoom. Looks fine, I've never taken a photo with it. $75. > > Manfrotto 3420 telephoto lens support. Just what you need for that FA* 300/4 > with no tripod mount. Near perfect condition, with box. $40. > > All prices include shipping to 48 states. Inquire for elsewhere. > > TERMS: All sales "as is" with 10-day no-fault return: In other words, get it > back to me within 10 days of your receipt in same condition at your expense > and I'll return purchase price, less original shipping. Payment by USPS > Money order, Paypal, bank check. Personal check OK for items less than $100 > if I recognize you as a regular contributor to PDML. > > Bob Keefer > (541) 338-2325 days > > > > > >
RE: Pz-1p question
Never had this problem before, but using Hyper Manual I set the aperture ring on the len to A position, and turn aperture dial on the camera. Andy -Original Message- From: Ralph R. Echtinaw [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 11:39 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Pz-1p question Hi, I'm new to the list and have a question about the Pz-1p as there is either something wrong with mine, or I have it adjusted incorrectly. I have grown accustomed to using it in the Hyper Manual mode when shooting basketball games. I do this because the full-auto mode usually selects a shutter speed of 125, and I need 250. So I've been going into Hyper Manual mode and manually selecting a shutter speed of 250. I set the aperture by turning the f-stop ring on the lens off of the auto position and onto the exact f-stop I need (usually 2.8). The film is underexposed, but Wal-Mart compensates for that in the processing. However I noticed a problem right after I last changed the battery. The camera no longer responds when I manually select an f-stop. It ends up on f22, which would underexpose even an outdoor basketball game at high noon on the equator. I found another way to manually select the f-stop and shutter speed in Hyper Manual mode, so it's not like I can't shoot basketball until this problem is solved. But I would like to know if I have a switch in the wrong position, or a real problem. And if I may ask one more question. Is there any difference between batteries? The Pz-1p takes a 2CR5, and I have been using the Radio Shack version because it's the least expensive. Would I be better off with Duracell, or Eveready? Ralph R. Echtinaw Hoop Match Photography Alma, Mich.
RE: Pz-1p question
> -Original Message- > From: Ralph R. Echtinaw [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > However I noticed a problem right after I last changed > the battery. > The camera no longer responds when I manually select an > f-stop. It ends > up on f22, which would underexpose even an outdoor > basketball game at > high noon on the equator. Turn the camera off and on a couple of times. Take the battery out, let it sit for a while, then put it back in. Try a different lens. Clean the lens and camera contacts with an eraser. If none of that works it needs to be serviced. tv
Re: Pz-1p question
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Ralph R. Echtinaw wrote: > And if I may ask one more question. Is there any difference between > batteries? The Pz-1p takes a 2CR5, and I have been using the Radio Shack > version because it's the least expensive. Would I be better off with > Duracell, or Eveready? Can't speak for THIS occasion, but normally Radio Shack batteries are as good as most major competitors. I have a difficult time shelling out extra money for "titanium core digitally specified" batteries..
Re: PZ-1p and autofocus speed...
I agree wholeheartedly. I think when a few very vocal members of the PDML begin to discredit a lens or camera everyone starts to believe it as fact. The SMC 85mm F2 is a good example. An excellent lens that, in some test cases, proves sharper than the faster Pentax 85s yet can't get no respect on the list But I digress I have a pile of LXs and a PZ1. There are things about the PZ1 I would like to change, but I must admit that whenever I use it the results are excellent. I find it perfect for the times I either don't want to think about exposures etc., or do not have the time. It's a great camera. In fact, there is one right now sitting at a camera store nearby with a 28-105mm on it selling for just over $400 Cdn. I think I paid that for the lens alone. Anyway, enjoy... Vic In a message dated 9/27/02 4:47:51 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Nick, I have read lots of reviews on the PZ1p "how does it compare to..." , "isn't the AF old", blah, blah, blah. Most of the reviews are favorable. It is highly regarded to be so "old". In practice, I find the AF to be dead on accurate, fast, etc. I think the reason you hear so much negative about it on the group is that some of the more vocal members(not to be taken as an insult) don't care for its overall-user interface, AF speed, one AF point, etc. I disagree. In use, I find it a pleasure. The performance you seem to get from yours is remarkable considering you are using "slow lenses". A testament to its AF abilities. I bet the camera would really shine with an 80-200 f2.8(maybe a Tokina if you can't get the Pentax). Robert >>
Re: PZ-1p and autofocus speed...
In a message dated 9/26/02 11:15:55 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << That's exactly why I mentioned what lenses I have been using. I purchased the manual focus Tokina 80-200/2.8 because I really wanted to save up for the Pentax in AF. But I think I'm going to spring soon for the AF Tokina cause I really like AF, and it'll prolly be awhile before I can get the Pentax. Nick Wright wrightfoto.com >> Nick let me know when you want to sell the manual focus version... Vic
Re: PZ-1p and autofocus speed...
> I have read lots of reviews on the PZ1p "how does it compare to..." , "isn't the AF old", blah, blah, blah. > Most of the reviews are favorable. It is highly regarded to be so "old". In practice, I find the AF to be dead on accurate, fast, etc. I think the reason you hear so much negative about it on the group is that some of the more vocal members(not to be taken as an insult) don't care for its overall-user interface, AF speed, one AF point, etc. I disagree. In use, I find it a pleasure. The performance you seem to get from yours is remarkable considering you are using "slow lenses". A testament to its AF abilities. I bet the camera would really shine with an 80-200 f2.8(maybe a Tokina if you can't get the Pentax). I have found the AF speed of the Z-1p much depends on which lens was used. Some slow, some fast. regards, Alan Chan
Vs: Spotty F metering [WAS: Re: PZ-1p (8-segment) vs. MZ-S (6-segment) multi-patternmetering]
It is total area averaging - with greater sensitivity at a large horizontal number 8 pattern - because there are 2 cells that read the screen from both sides of the eyepiece. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 21. elokuuta 2002 21:11 Aihe: Spotty F metering [WAS: Re: PZ-1p (8-segment) vs. MZ-S (6-segment) multi-patternmetering] >Pål Jensen wrote: >> >= snipped = > >> The Pentax 6-segment meter is among the best in business. I haven't >> directly compared the Z-1p meter with the MZ-S. However, my impression >> is that if you're using slide film the MZ-S meter is better. The Z-1p >> meter seem slight more tuned towards overexposure whereas the MZ-S and >> 645N meters almost never overexposes. > >Can anyone lead me to the pattern the Spotmatic F meter covers? >This camera has a nice microprism spot (I sure wish it had a central >split!) and the area seems too small for a "center-weighted" meter >coverage. It's closer to what I imagine the Spotmatic 'spot' would >have covered initially... > >Does anyone recall a drawing of the approximate coverage? I would like >to know how much area off dead-center the meter looks at, if for >nothing else than to judge how much to compensate. > >Yes, I suppose I could make a big deal out of extensively testing it, >but it sure would save me a lot of time if someone actually knew! > >Thanks, > >keith whaley - 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 .
Spotty F metering [WAS: Re: PZ-1p (8-segment) vs. MZ-S (6-segment) multi-patternmetering]
Pål Jensen wrote: > = snipped = > The Pentax 6-segment meter is among the best in business. I haven't > directly compared the Z-1p meter with the MZ-S. However, my impression > is that if you're using slide film the MZ-S meter is better. The Z-1p > meter seem slight more tuned towards overexposure whereas the MZ-S and > 645N meters almost never overexposes. Can anyone lead me to the pattern the Spotmatic F meter covers? This camera has a nice microprism spot (I sure wish it had a central split!) and the area seems too small for a "center-weighted" meter coverage. It's closer to what I imagine the Spotmatic 'spot' would have covered initially... Does anyone recall a drawing of the approximate coverage? I would like to know how much area off dead-center the meter looks at, if for nothing else than to judge how much to compensate. Yes, I suppose I could make a big deal out of extensively testing it, but it sure would save me a lot of time if someone actually knew! Thanks, keith whaley - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p (8-segment) vs. MZ-S (6-segment) multi-pattern metering
I agree that the 6 segment on the MZ-S is better for slide film. My Z1p overexposes with slide film. More segments doesn't always mean better. >From: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: PZ-1p (8-segment) vs. MZ-S (6-segment) multi-pattern metering >Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 14:45:58 +0200 > >Robert wrote: > > > Just out of interest, why did Pentax switch from an eight-segment > > multi-pattern metering system (PZ-1p) to a six-segment system (MZ-S)? Does > > anyone have any insight? I'm not implying that the MZ-S meter is worse - I > > don't believe in sheer numbers (the nine segment Minolta meters seem to test > > consistently better than the EOSIVs); I just wonder why they'd take an > > APPARENT step back. Was there any problem with the PZ-1p's system? Or was > > the six-segment an economy (because of sharing with other ZX cameras)? I've > > had excellent results from the 1p multi-pattern metering and scrunched my > > nose a little to see it gone in the MZ-S (which, as I said before, may be > > just as good or better). > > >The Pentax 6-segment meter is among the best in business. I haven't directly compared the Z-1p meter with the MZ-S. However, my impression is that if you're using slide film the MZ-S meter is better. The Z-1p meter seem slight more tuned towards overexposure whereas the MZ-S and 645N meters almost never overexposes. > >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 . > Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. Click Here - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p (8-segment) vs. MZ-S (6-segment) multi-pattern metering
I don't know for sure but I would bet that it was done to control costs. If they can make software process the information with fewer segments they will in the long run save money. It's a trend you can see in almost every computerized device. If you can do that and give better results... At 09:16 PM 8/20/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Just out of interest, why did Pentax switch from an eight-segment >multi-pattern metering system (PZ-1p) to a six-segment system >(MZ-S)? Does anyone have any insight? I'm not implying that the MZ-S >meter is worse - I don't believe in sheer numbers (the nine segment >Minolta meters seem to test consistently better than the EOSIVs); I just >wonder why they'd take an APPARENT step back. Was there any problem with >the PZ-1p's system? Or was the six-segment an economy (because of sharing >with other ZX cameras)? I've had excellent results from the 1p >multi-pattern metering and scrunched my nose a little to see it gone in >the MZ-S (which, as I said before, may be just as good or better). > >Robert Soames Wetmore >_ > >"I am not interested in constructing a building so much as in having a >perspicuous view of the foundations of possible buildings" >Wittgenstein > > >_ >MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: >http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx >- >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 . - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p (8-segment) vs. MZ-S (6-segment) multi-pattern metering
I found the multisegment to be consistently more accurate in the MZ-S that the PZ1, i dont think its the amount of segments that counts, its how the software deals with it. Paul - Original Message - From: "Robert Soames Wetmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 11:16 AM Subject: PZ-1p (8-segment) vs. MZ-S (6-segment) multi-pattern metering > Just out of interest, why did Pentax switch from an eight-segment > multi-pattern metering system (PZ-1p) to a six-segment system (MZ-S)? Does > anyone have any insight? I'm not implying that the MZ-S meter is worse - I > don't believe in sheer numbers (the nine segment Minolta meters seem to test > consistently better than the EOSIVs); I just wonder why they'd take an > APPARENT step back. Was there any problem with the PZ-1p's system? Or was > the six-segment an economy (because of sharing with other ZX cameras)? I've > had excellent results from the 1p multi-pattern metering and scrunched my > nose a little to see it gone in the MZ-S (which, as I said before, may be > just as good or better). > > Robert Soames Wetmore > _ > > "I am not interested in constructing a building so much as in having a > perspicuous view of the foundations of possible buildings" > Wittgenstein > > > _ > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > - > 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 . - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p battery grip
I tried 4 AA batteries in my PZ1-p last month and it works perfectly. I didn't notice any difference from the original battery. I just need to find out a nice way to hold the batteries. Regards Alex -- Alexandre A. P. Suaide, Ph.D. mailto::[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wayne State University - Detroit, MI - Original Message - From: "Nikon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 11:56 PM Subject: RE: PZ-1p battery grip > Thanks Rob! > > So does it mean, that I could try connecting 4 AA-cells to my PZ-1 > without fearing that it will damage the camera circuitry? I had > seen this page earlier but would want to go ahead only if someone > tells me that I can't damage the camera by connecting incorrect > amperage to the camera. Of course may refuse to work, but I just > want to know whether I can potentially damage the camera. > > Gaurav > > > -Original Message- > > From: Robert Soames Wetmore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 9:17 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: PZ-1p battery grip > > > > > > Regarding your message: > > > > Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 18:04:05 +0530 > > From: "Gaurav Aggarwal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Building a battery grip for PZ-1 (a FAQ perhaps!) > > > > A former (and perhaps current?) listmember Dave Cam was working on such a > > grip, but seems to have given up: > > > > "http://www.wdcamengineering.com/pentax.htm"; > > > > He keeps saying he's still working on it, but I don't think he'll ever > > finish. Maybe at some point someone could buy the prototype and > > get a few made. > > > > I've seen other examples made, but none so nice as this one. > > > > Take care- > > > > Rob > > > > > Want to sell your car? advertise on Yahoo Autos Classifieds. It's Free!! >visit http://in.autos.yahoo.com > - > 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 . - 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 .
RE: PZ-1p battery grip
Thanks Rob! So does it mean, that I could try connecting 4 AA-cells to my PZ-1 without fearing that it will damage the camera circuitry? I had seen this page earlier but would want to go ahead only if someone tells me that I can't damage the camera by connecting incorrect amperage to the camera. Of course may refuse to work, but I just want to know whether I can potentially damage the camera. Gaurav > -Original Message- > From: Robert Soames Wetmore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 9:17 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: PZ-1p battery grip > > > Regarding your message: > > Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 18:04:05 +0530 > From: "Gaurav Aggarwal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Building a battery grip for PZ-1 (a FAQ perhaps!) > > A former (and perhaps current?) listmember Dave Cam was working on such a > grip, but seems to have given up: > > "http://www.wdcamengineering.com/pentax.htm"; > > He keeps saying he's still working on it, but I don't think he'll ever > finish. Maybe at some point someone could buy the prototype and > get a few made. > > I've seen other examples made, but none so nice as this one. > > Take care- > > Rob > Want to sell your car? advertise on Yahoo Autos Classifieds. It's Free!! visit http://in.autos.yahoo.com - 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 .
Re: PZ-1P Low Light Capability
Hello, Frank. I have tried to compare the Z-1 and the LX for accuracy in low light conditions. The meter in Z-1 is the same as in Z-1p, I think. It's an unfair comparison since the the LX meter works off the film and is centerweight whereas the Z-1 is off the mirror and multi-field. But I was only interested in the result for practical purposes. My result was that within the guaranteed metering range of the Z-1, the Z-1 multifield is usually as good as the LX centerweight. Sometimes it's better. Most noticeably with bright surfaces (snow in my test, but sunny ripples on water too i guess...). When the light is below the metering range for Z-1, the LX just goes on and on. Just love that camera...:-) Best, Jostein - Original Message - From: "Frank Knapik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:27 PM Subject: PZ-1P Low Light Capability > Hello. I know the LX reigns supreme with regards to low light shooting, but does anyone have any actual experience using the PZ-1P under low light conditions? If so, please share your observation/opinion. Thank you. > > Francis T. Knapik > - > 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 . - 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 .
Re: PZ-1P Low Light Capability
Frank Knapik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello. I know the LX reigns supreme with regards to low light shooting, but does anyone have any actual experience using the PZ-1P under low light conditions? If so, please share your observation/opinion. Thank you. > Hi Frank, It depends on how low are the light conditions we are talking about. I made some woderful shot of 20-30 sec. with a Z-1 ten years ago, but I've never used the Z-1p for low light stuff (except sometimes handheld shots of maybe 1/8s at f/1.4). The Z-1/Z-1p doesn't let you take shots of more than the nominal 30 sec. in Auto, while other cameras (including K2, MEsuper and SuperA) do (correct me if I'm wrong...). Gianfranco = Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com - 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 .
Re: PZ-1P Low Light Capability
Frank wrote: > Hello. I know the LX reigns supreme with regards to low light shooting, but does >anyone have any actual experience using the PZ-1P under low light conditions? If so, >please share your observation/opinion. Thank you. > Basically it sucks (like all modern cameras). When the light go dim the display in the viewfinder will start blinking indicating "out of range of meter". You then have to use the "B" setting with the gross battery consumption penalty that follows it. 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 .
RE: PZ-1P Low Light Capability
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Frank Knapik > > > Hello. I know the LX reigns supreme with regards to low > light shooting, but does anyone have any actual experience > using the PZ-1P under low light conditions? If so, please > share your observation/opinion. Thank you. Depends on what you're doing. The meter is fine, though not OTF. Manual focusing isn't that great. Flash metering is excellent. tv - 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 .
RE: PZ-1p to MZ-S
Burt, It sounds like you've got a very versatile array of gear. Have you added any digital cameras yet? Len --- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 7:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PZ-1p to MZ-S I moved from Canon/Nikon/Minolta/Contax and the PZ-1p to the MZ-S. Is it worth it. I thought it was to the tune of 2 BLACK bodies and one overpriced (list) SILVER body from Japan. I first moved over to the Pentax systen, from the big three and Contax G2. I started with a ZX-5n and a PZ-1p. Fell in love with the limited 43/1.9. Now have all three. Even had the grip for the PZ-1p. I liked everything about the PZ-1p except that #%$@ focusing. Slow and hunted like a hound dog. The ZX-5n was a piece of heaven except I wanted a tougher ZX-5n/PZ-1p combo. Wrote to Pentax 3 years ago outlining a combo camera. Left Pentax to go back to Canon then Monolta with the Max 7. When the MZ-S came out it was a perfect match for my combo camera. Rebought the 43/1.9 added the 77 and later the 31 (limiteds). Uswe Tamron's 24-135 SP as standard lens, on a black MZ-S. Use limiteds with 24/2 on my Silver MZ-S. Best kept secret lens, the 17-28 fisheye zoom. Mine is one supersharp honey. Use a black MZ-S with Sigma's 20/1.8, 15-30mm and 24-70/2.8, EXs all. Have Pentax 80-320 and Tamron 90/2.8 Macro SP as special lense. Use 2 ZX-5ns as backup. New Pentax flash is best ever used. Best thing about all bodies. Use AA lithium batteries in all grips on all bodies. Burt NYC USA - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p mirror sticking
Thanks! Passed this info along to my husband, who promptly checked the baffling (fine), and decided you're right on the voltage problem. He'll be watching for it in the future. - Original Message - From: "Patrick White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pentaxdiscuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:39 AM Subject: Re: PZ-1p mirror sticking > > I've got two possibilities: > If you are using an external flash, you might need to wait a few seconds > after the flash-ready light comes on before firing. Mine used to have the > mirror stick up for a while after certain shots. After asking around here, > we tracked it down to what appears to be a flash-ready signal voltage > problem (apparently the LX has the same sort of problem) -- waiting an extra > 10 seconds before firing allows the signal voltage to get high enough to not > confuse the imp inside the camera. I've had no problems with it since, as > long as I remember to give the flash the extra time. > The other thing I've noticed, althrough I haven't had any problems from it > yet, is that the sticky-backed gray light baffle inside the mirror box is > coming unstuck. Mine has been doing this for years now. While it does rub > on the mirror, it doesn't seem to be causing any problems (yet?). If yours > has bubbled more than mine, or the sticky backing has gotten onto the side > of the mirror, it might be causing the problem too. - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p mirror sticking
I have two of them and it never happened to me. - Original Message - From: Patrick White Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:39 AM To: pentaxdiscuss Subject: Re: PZ-1p mirror sticking "Treena Harp" wrote: >OK, here's a question for any PZ-1p users out there -- have any of you had >the mirror stick while using the camera? We got the mirror unstuck by just >holding down the shutter release, and the camera is back to normal, but have >any of the rest of you had that happen? If so, does it happen often? What >did you do to fix it? I've got two possibilities: If you are using an external flash, you might need to wait a few seconds after the flash-ready light comes on before firing. Mine used to have the mirror stick up for a while after certain shots. After asking around here, we tracked it down to what appears to be a flash-ready signal voltage problem (apparently the LX has the same sort of problem) -- waiting an extra 10 seconds before firing allows the signal voltage to get high enough to not confuse the imp inside the camera. I've had no problems with it since, as long as I remember to give the flash the extra time. The other thing I've noticed, althrough I haven't had any problems from it yet, is that the sticky-backed gray light baffle inside the mirror box is coming unstuck. Mine has been doing this for years now. While it does rub on the mirror, it doesn't seem to be causing any problems (yet?). If yours has bubbled more than mine, or the sticky backing has gotten onto the side of the mirror, it might be causing the problem too. hope this helps, patbob ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - 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 . - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p mirror sticking
After almost two years of heavy use, my pz1p did what sounds like almost the same thing. I took a picture, the mirror never went back down. But, in my case, no amount of firing the shutter or wiggling the mirror had any effect. I sent it to Pentax USA, it was back just like new in about 3-4 days. Nick --- Treena Harp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK, here's a question for any PZ-1p users out there > -- have any of you had > the mirror stick while using the camera? We got the > mirror unstuck by just > holding down the shutter release, and the camera is > back to normal, but have > any of the rest of you had that happen? If so, does > it happen often? What > did you do to fix it? > - > 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 . Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games http://sports.yahoo.com - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p and lens ordered
- Original Message - From: "Marc Schlotthauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 10:48 AM Subject: PZ-1p and lens ordered > I ordered my PZ-1p from B&H ($479.95), and ordered the 28-70/4 from KEH in >"Excellent" > condition for $109 - can't beat that. Excellent choice here..I've got both and while the 28-70/4 is an outstanding lens, it feels a tad light on the PZ-1p. You will be like me I imagine, and be purchasing a FA28-105/4-5.6 some time in the near future! :) > > This will be the first time I've owned an SLR without having a compatible 50mm > prime (which feels very strange), but I don't think the 50/1.4 will be far off Another great choice in 50mm lenses is the F 50mm/1.7. But the real beauty of the PZ-1p is you can use *any* K-mount 50mm lens on it. If you look around, M and A series 50mm are all over eBay, and can usually be gotten quite cheaply as most people look down on the 50mm lens these days John - 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 .
Re: PZ-1P kits
This is all excellent advice. Only thing I'd ad is that I bought my first 1p from Beach. The transaction went fine. When I looked around to buy a second about a year ago, Beach was out of them. The FA 28-105 power zoom (as Robert recommended) is great and balances well on the 1p (for which it was made). You can find a good used one at KEH. Joe >* From: Robert Soames Wetmore >* Subject: Re: PZ-1P kits >* Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 17:28:47 -0800 > > > > Marc, > > On the surface, this isn't a bad way to go. There are a few things I'd be > careful of, though. One trick I've seen is that there is a substantial > extra charge for something that is already included with the camera: "You > want the eyepiece? That's $xx more." Another trick is of course the > possibility of off-brand lenses, even if the ad makes them appear to be > Pentax. Sometimes it will say "f/ptx" [translation: "for Pentax"] or ptxm > ["pentax mount"] or some such nonsense. Another issue is that there might > be some small print somewhere about the fact that you're not getting a new > product, or not getting a USA warranty, or getting a refurbished item. > Sometimes the shipping and handling costs are actually like 10% of the price > or more. Also, sometimes they'll charge your card and then tell you that > the lenses are out of stock at the moment and on backorder, which they'll be > on indefinitely - and good luck getting a refund. These are just off the > top of my head as a former New Yorker - I assume we're talking about CCI, > Tri-State, Abe's, Beach, Focus, Smile, etc. > > I'd recommend B&H, Adorama, or CameraWorld, though I've also had success > when I've risked some of the others (such as Focus and 17photo), knowing > EXACTLY what I was getting and keeping things simple. > > How about the PZ-1p ($480 at B&H) and 35mm/2.0 ($284 at B&H) and 50mm/1.4 > ($185 at B&H) for a total of $949? Then in a while add the 135/2.8 ($309), > then maybe something between the 50 and the 135, then something wider than > the 35 or longer than the 135. > > If that's too expensive, I'd start with the PZ-1p and just the FA 28-105 > f/4-5.6 (the older style black powerzoom model 27667, such as the one now at > Focus for $254). There have been quite a few 28-105s, and they vary. The > one I mention is still around new in a few places and is excellent. The > succeeding one, gray instead of black, wasn't quite so good. There's > another brand new one, the FA 28-105 f/3.2-4.5 AL (IF), that is getting good > reviews. The 100-300 is pretty bad, the 80-320 somewhat better: I'd avoid > both, though there's no inexpensive Pentax-brand alternative. > > By the way, the FA 28-70 f/4 is a super buy, though they're getting > difficult to find now. (Focus is one place that still has them - and > cheap.) You could get this or the 28-105 I mentioned above, then think > about your next step - maybe a longer prime lens. > > I love my PZ-1p and believe it to be a fantastic value for the money. > > Good luck with your purchase! > > Rob > > _ > Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. > http://www.hotmail.com > - > 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 . > > > >* PZ-1P kits, Marc Schlotthauer > o Re: PZ-1P kits, aimcompute > o Re: PZ-1P kits, Robert Soames Wetmore > > > >archive.com/pentax-discuss%40<-- Chronological --> > > > top of my head as a former New Yorker - I assume we're talking about CCI, Tri-State, Abe's, Beach, Focus, Smile, etc. I'd recommend B&H, Adorama, or CameraWorld, though I've also had success when I've risked some of the others (such as Focus and 17photo), knowing EXACTLY what I was getting and keeping things simple. How aReply via email to > >
Re: PZ-1P kits
Marc, On the surface, this isn't a bad way to go. There are a few things I'd be careful of, though. One trick I've seen is that there is a substantial extra charge for something that is already included with the camera: "You want the eyepiece? That's $xx more." Another trick is of course the possibility of off-brand lenses, even if the ad makes them appear to be Pentax. Sometimes it will say "f/ptx" [translation: "for Pentax"] or ptxm ["pentax mount"] or some such nonsense. Another issue is that there might be some small print somewhere about the fact that you're not getting a new product, or not getting a USA warranty, or getting a refurbished item. Sometimes the shipping and handling costs are actually like 10% of the price or more. Also, sometimes they'll charge your card and then tell you that the lenses are out of stock at the moment and on backorder, which they'll be on indefinitely - and good luck getting a refund. These are just off the top of my head as a former New Yorker - I assume we're talking about CCI, Tri-State, Abe's, Beach, Focus, Smile, etc. I'd recommend B&H, Adorama, or CameraWorld, though I've also had success when I've risked some of the others (such as Focus and 17photo), knowing EXACTLY what I was getting and keeping things simple. How about the PZ-1p ($480 at B&H) and 35mm/2.0 ($284 at B&H) and 50mm/1.4 ($185 at B&H) for a total of $949? Then in a while add the 135/2.8 ($309), then maybe something between the 50 and the 135, then something wider than the 35 or longer than the 135. If that's too expensive, I'd start with the PZ-1p and just the FA 28-105 f/4-5.6 (the older style black powerzoom model 27667, such as the one now at Focus for $254). There have been quite a few 28-105s, and they vary. The one I mention is still around new in a few places and is excellent. The succeeding one, gray instead of black, wasn't quite so good. There's another brand new one, the FA 28-105 f/3.2-4.5 AL (IF), that is getting good reviews. The 100-300 is pretty bad, the 80-320 somewhat better: I'd avoid both, though there's no inexpensive Pentax-brand alternative. By the way, the FA 28-70 f/4 is a super buy, though they're getting difficult to find now. (Focus is one place that still has them - and cheap.) You could get this or the 28-105 I mentioned above, then think about your next step - maybe a longer prime lens. I love my PZ-1p and believe it to be a fantastic value for the money. Good luck with your purchase! Rob _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com - 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 .
Re: PZ-1P kits
Overall not a bad way to go. If you decide you want better, you can probably sell the lenses for at least as much as you "paid". Tom C. - Original Message - From: "Marc Schlotthauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 3:35 PM Subject: PZ-1P kits > Greetings - > > I'm trying to find the catch here...some of these bare-bones discount camera > mail order places are offering deals like the PZ-1p plus the Pentax 28-105 and > the Pentax 100-300 zooms for around $600.00. I know these zooms probably aren't > the best optically, but heck, to get the PZ-1p and the ability to shoot any > length either AF or MF from 28mm to 300mm for $600 seems like a no-brainer to > me. I'm switching over from all my old Spotmatic gear, so I'm starting fresh > with no hardware (kinds scary, but fun as well), and I'm trying to be somewhat > budget-conscious... > > Comments? > > Marc > WVI WEBMAIL - http://www.wvi.com > - > 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 . - 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 .
RE: PZ-1p Review
I've found that, locally, the cost and potential (very low) quantity sales of the MZ-S keeps it from the store shelves. (I know because I asked.) A self-fulfilling prophecy. Salesmen need motivation. Stores need motivation. That requires an investment. Maybe, someday, Pentax will realize that. They've got good product sitting on warehouse shelves that's going no good. My2c, Collin - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Are you saying that stocks are selling out, or that cameras are not reaching the stores? aimcompute wrote: > I think we'll see the same kind of sales > pattern with the MZ-S. It's already been > reported as "hard to find" in stores by a > number of people on this list. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Hey Jim. That's cool. I think you'll be suitably impressed, whether you were referring to the PZ-1p or MZ-S. To continue you this thread, I still don't think the PZ-1/1p's lack luster sales had anything to do with the camera itself. It had more to do with: 1. The lemming-like approach to buying an SLR that is practiced by the general public (i.e. everyone says Nikon's the best so it must be best). 2. The fact that most salespeople are more interested in their wallet and will sell the highest profit, highest spiff item first. Not condemning that, they need to eat to. 3. The pitiful lack of advertising done by Pentax at the time. 4. Pentax was already so far behind the big 2 in brand recognition, the competition was just too great for a "pro"-camera body at this time. 5. I was not into AF at the time, but apparently there were not many lenses available. When I bought mine 3.5 years ago, I was originally intending to get a Nikon something or other. The N70, I just didn't like. The N90 was nice, and I was fully intending to purchase one, but no RTF and the price for a Nikon flash head was outrageous. It was then I looked at the PZ-1p and really started comparing it. Wow! And I can continue to use my MF lenses on it. IMO, it's simply impossible to get more for your money, if you're in the market for an AF body. I think we'll see the same kind of sales pattern with the MZ-S. It's already been reported as "hard to find" in stores by a number of people on this list. Items that are not stocked or not displayed, not to mention not handed to the customer, just don't sell that well. I suspect most buying it are former Pentax owners. I hope it does do well. I'd like to see at least one more high end 35mm body by Pentax. Tom C. - Original Message - From: "James Moniz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 2:07 AM Subject: Re: PZ-1p review > Well, you've sold me on one...I've decided that, for my purposes, it would be an excellent choice. > Jim > -- - 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 .
RE: PZ-1p review
Possibly. Minolta generally releases limited production versions of their cameras not for sales but for promotions sort of like the LX2000. They only made 1000 of the Maxxum 9ti. We heard on the grapevine (somebody found some kind of new digital product AVI file on a Minolta server somewhere) that Minolta is announcing some new digital camera in the first week of January. Whether it is the rumored digital 7 or 9 body is pure speculation. I keep waiting to see whether Minolta or Pentax will be the first between them out with a 4+ MP 35mm type digital body. I'll only switch back to Canon most likely if nothing comes out in the next year or so. Eventually I'll will have to add a high end digital body to my equipment (while I practice with the Minolta RD-175 I picked up used). As it is right now I'm too busy to do much shooting. Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Pål Jensen Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 3:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PZ-1p review Kent wrote: > Actually failure in the marketplace is relative. Minolta can sell every > Maxxum 7 they can build. They just can't meet demand and they are also still > on the losing side of the dollar equation when you factor in R&D and > marketing costs. Not according to the Finacial times. I believe (if my memory serves me right) that projected sales of the Dynaxx7 was 40 - 50 000/units a month something that make the real production of 8000 units downright pathetic. Volume is probably lower by now. Its clear to me that Minolta tried to repeat the success of the original 7 of 1985, that sold 2 million in couple of years, but failed in these Nikon vs. Canon times. I also doubt that the Dynaxx7 cannot meet demand. They have just released a Limited version a sure sign that they want to increase sales. 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 . ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com ** - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Well, you've sold me on one...I've decided that, for my purposes, it would be an excellent choice. Jim -- ___ Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free! http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143 - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Oh :-). Tom C. - Original Message - From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 10:39 AM Subject: Re: PZ-1p review > Tom wrote: > > > Do you realize your posts are full of back-handed insults? > > No. > > > > "All function on the MZ-S is clearly market and totally intuitive for anyone > > who can read." > > > Which is a fact. No person have so far claimed that he don't undersatnd where the meter switch or drive mode switch is located on the MZ-S. If anyone insinuate as much they are cheating or can't read (or more precisely, blind). It is description of reality and cannot be insulting. > > > "One may well enjoy the Z-1p. But them one would probably enjoy any Canon or > > Minolta just as well." > > If enjoying a Canon or a Minolta is insulting then your right. The Z-1p has more in common with Canons and Mnoltas than the MZ-S does. Hence, the comparison. No insult intended. > > > > "If you can't adjust the aperture on any Pentax without taking the eye from > > the viewfinder you are handicapped!" > > Which is a fact to. The only way to not beeing able to set the aperture with the eye from the viewfinder is lacking you left arm. Hence, handicapped. No insult intended. Preferences is something diferent and some prefer this way or that but saying things are impossibly requires a handicap. > > > > You needn't insult others when they don't agree with you or share your > > viewpoint. > > I don't. I'm not participating in a flame war. You seem to be. I' stating my opinion which you are free to disagree with. > > > > It would be like me saying you are stupid because after 6 > > years you still can't get the hang of using a PZ-1p. > > I don't know why you should. I haven't accused anyone for stupidity. However, according to Frank Zappa the most common element in the universe is not hydrogen as widely believed, but stupidity. So who knows? > > > 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 . - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Kent wrote: > Actually failure in the marketplace is relative. Minolta can sell every > Maxxum 7 they can build. They just can't meet demand and they are also still > on the losing side of the dollar equation when you factor in R&D and > marketing costs. Not according to the Finacial times. I believe (if my memory serves me right) that projected sales of the Dynaxx7 was 40 - 50 000/units a month something that make the real production of 8000 units downright pathetic. Volume is probably lower by now. Its clear to me that Minolta tried to repeat the success of the original 7 of 1985, that sold 2 million in couple of years, but failed in these Nikon vs. Canon times. I also doubt that the Dynaxx7 cannot meet demand. They have just released a Limited version a sure sign that they want to increase sales. 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Tom wrote: > Do you realize your posts are full of back-handed insults? No. > "All function on the MZ-S is clearly market and totally intuitive for anyone > who can read." Which is a fact. No person have so far claimed that he don't undersatnd where the meter switch or drive mode switch is located on the MZ-S. If anyone insinuate as much they are cheating or can't read (or more precisely, blind). It is description of reality and cannot be insulting. > "One may well enjoy the Z-1p. But them one would probably enjoy any Canon or > Minolta just as well." If enjoying a Canon or a Minolta is insulting then your right. The Z-1p has more in common with Canons and Mnoltas than the MZ-S does. Hence, the comparison. No insult intended. > "If you can't adjust the aperture on any Pentax without taking the eye from > the viewfinder you are handicapped!" Which is a fact to. The only way to not beeing able to set the aperture with the eye from the viewfinder is lacking you left arm. Hence, handicapped. No insult intended. Preferences is something diferent and some prefer this way or that but saying things are impossibly requires a handicap. > You needn't insult others when they don't agree with you or share your > viewpoint. I don't. I'm not participating in a flame war. You seem to be. I' stating my opinion which you are free to disagree with. > It would be like me saying you are stupid because after 6 > years you still can't get the hang of using a PZ-1p. I don't know why you should. I haven't accused anyone for stupidity. However, according to Frank Zappa the most common element in the universe is not hydrogen as widely believed, but stupidity. So who knows? 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Pal, Do you realize your posts are full of back-handed insults? "All function on the MZ-S is clearly market and totally intuitive for anyone who can read." "One may well enjoy the Z-1p. But them one would probably enjoy any Canon or Minolta just as well." "If you can't adjust the aperture on any Pentax without taking the eye from the viewfinder you are handicapped!" You needn't insult others when they don't agree with you or share your viewpoint. The camera body a person chooses has no bearing on who they are as a person. It would be like me saying you are stupid because after 6 years you still can't get the hang of using a PZ-1p. That wouldn't be a very nice thing to say, would it? Tom C. - Original Message - From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 7:47 AM Subject: Re: PZ-1p review > Tom wrote: > > > > Remember most of the manufactures offer "spiffs" to the salesman for selling > > their product. Guess who gives better spiffs, Pentax or Nikon? Now which > > would you push if you were him? > > > I believe its misguided to blame the Z-1p's lack on sucess on external factors. It didn't reach the shops because it didn't get out of them fast enough. In fact, I suspect Pentax deleted the LX from the world market to push the Z-1p. A Pentax rep told me that the Z-1p increasingly become an impossible sell and that it never really sold in the first place. In comparison, the Pentax rep said that the MZ-S has sold beyond their expectations. > One may well enjoy the Z-1p. But them one would probably enjoy any Canon or Minolta just as well. And thats probably the basic problem with the Z-1p. You can't say the same of the MZ-S; its unique. > When the Z-1 was release most users didn't have a large inventoty of AF lenses. The camera was not sufficiently different from the competition to prevent people to switch brands in hordes to Nikon, Canon and Minolta when they were rerady to take the plunge to AF. > > > 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 . - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
I said "shutup" because it's obvious his response was just a devil's advocate post, as usual is very biased and opinionated, was very negative, and contains little if anything constructive. I wasn't saying "shutup" as a directive. I was saying it more as a "good grief". Everyone has the right to an opinion. However this thread was being enjoyed by those who enjoy their PZ-1p's. Pal's post was nothing more than attempt to bash the PZ-1p. And... I don't believe he knows what he's talking about, especially when it comes to getting into the "mind of Pentax". This having been said... for anyone out there looking for a great camera at a great price. Check out the PZ-1p while you can still get them. Pal will probably think a rush to buy bargain basement PZ-1p's will signal the demise of the MZ-S. Tom C. - Original Message - From: "Robert Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 4:05 PM Subject: Re: PZ-1p review > aimcompute wrote: > > > Oh shutup Pal, > > > Why should he shut up? He makes perfect sense on, this issue at least. > > > > Not only many of us, but other camera reviewers don't agree with you. > > > These delusions tend to attract crowds. :) > > I share Pal's views but shut up about the Z1/Z1-p a long time ago, > shouted down by the sycophants. > > > > The fact it didn't do well may be part marketing, part Nikon/Canon mentality > > of the consumer-masses. > > > And part because it looks like an ungainly brick. > > Bob > - > 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 . - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Tom wrote: > OK. Tell me then... Pentax spends millions of dollars designing an > instrument and then doesn't hope to sell them in large volumes? We're not > talking about Ferraris and Lamborghinis here. We're talking about something > that a significant portion of the market could obtain. The MZ-S is manufactured at 3000 units a month. This is intitial production run. The Minolta Dynaxx7, which is the closest thing to modern interpretation of an Z-1p, is reaching volumes at 8000/month. This is not enough for break even on that camera and Minolta is loosing money on it in spite of being manufactured in the third world. It should be clear then that if pentax hopes to break even in a camera in this class; that is, a camera thats technically current, they should aim in the area of 10 000 units a month which is highly unlikely in my opinion.So the alternative is niche marketing. > Pentax spiting it's own user base deliberately? This is too much The Pentax user base consist mostly of LX, MX, ME etc users. They will be happy with the latest development on Pentax AF cameras. I think we also can say that 50% of the Z-1p users are more than happy with the MZ-S so there aren't that many left. 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
What??? Pal wrote: > > The MZ-S isn't designed to be sold in large volumes. Its a fine camera more in common wit the LX and the MX. > OK. Tell me then... Pentax spends millions of dollars designing an instrument and then doesn't hope to sell them in large volumes? We're not talking about Ferraris and Lamborghinis here. We're talking about something that a significant portion of the market could obtain. > >The Z-1p users weren't willing to pay so Pentax weren't willing to >serve them anymore. Pentax spiting it's own user base deliberately? This is too much Tom C. > > 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Well let's face it folks, what a camera looks like only determines... what it looks like. It's how it functions in the field that is really important. I'm sure as Bruce said, they're both capable cameras. If you ask me, even pretty dogs are ugly. Tom C. - Original Message - From: "Robert Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 9:04 PM Subject: Re: PZ-1p review > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In a message dated 12/26/2001 6:06:42 PM US Eastern Standard Time, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > >>And part because it looks like an ungainly brick. > > > > Have you taken the trouble to look closely at the competition? > > This silly question, which I take as an intended cute insult, is the > equivalent of telling me I should not judge one dog ugly until I go and > look at the other ugly, possibly uglier, dogs on the next block. So > what. That is not at all relevant to my observations. > > Bob > - > 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 . - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
John wrote: > And come on guys - is the MZ-S really all that well built? Yes. The MZ-S is extremely well built. It will withstand impact far better than the LX. In addition, it's a workhorse with durable metal parts. It also built with precision and sports a highly precise film transport. >I mean, > does it have weather sealing that will hold back a piddling fog? Yes. > Is it > sealed as well as the EOS 1v? No > Or do we drag out the price-performance > argument when comparing the EOS 1v and MZ-S, and in the next breath > loudly proclaim that the PZ1p is "bad" because the PZ1p provides > excellent value for the money? That fully depends on how you judge value. Brand value is the value appreciated most by the buying public and thats why Nikon and Canon are so popular in this price segment. Built quality is another value to reckon with. > Does anyone really think Pentax did not leave room for an improved > model MZ-Sn, for example something with faster max shutter speed, > faster flash sync, and maybe a couple of other features? Yes they do. They are busy on a camera thats supposed to outperform the benchmark - the Minolta Dynaxx7. Considering that the Minolta is a failure in the marketplace and that Minolta looses money on it, it is qestionable whether the Pentax will ever reach the market. If it does, I'll bet it won't be cheap. I expect that if Pentax want to make a loss leader they will make sure it sells in small numbers. >Or, more > likely, isn't it true that the MZ-S only exists at all because Pentax > needed a design frame for their digital camera? Absolutely. But you will see no camera, with the possible exception of an LX follow up, thats made in a vacuum anymore. Even the MZ-series is basically the same camera in different configurations and the electronics of the 645n is lifted wholesale from the MZ-5. > Introducing a new model such as the MZ-S as the be-all and end-all of > Pentax film cameras would go against the obvious current and ancient > history of Pentax design. The PZ1p does not have a direct upgrade > because Pentax fell out of competition against Nikon and Canon and > Minolta in the mid and upper range AF camera *systems*, not because of > any fault in the design of the PZ1p itself. They fell out of the competition because their answer in this class didn't sell. It is really as simple as that. The reason it didn't sell was that it had no appeal outside the hardcore Pentax comunity. It also alienated the Pentax core user group. It is no coincidence that the next generation of AF Pentaxe weres much better received and much different. > > If anything, they made the Pz1 too good; and the improved Pz1p too > good, and failed to reach the next level with an upgraded Pz1p because > ot system issues, and because Pentax side-tracked themselves with > selling point-and-shoots, and selling upscale point-and-shoots like > the whole MZ series. This is again wrong. The whole Z-series were designed as P&S. Automation was the key word including the zooming function. The following upper end models had far more emphasis on manual usage; eg MZ-5 and MZ-S. > In my mind, there's only three reasons to own Pentax at all: first is > the excellent Pentax glass, with its first-rate coatings. Second is > related to the first: backwards compatibliity with fine older lenses. > But the real kicker is value for money. If I had unlimited funds, and > became convinced Canon lenses would please me as well as my Pentax > lenses, I switch tomorrow. Or, more likely, I would have switched a > long time ago. In my opinion Pentax have never offered more vaue for money than eg. Canon and Minolta. Quite the oposite in fact. All manufactuers make good lenses and the backward compatibility is of no concern for those who don't own older lenses. > And if anyone thinks the MZ-S is all that great, just wait til Pentax > dumps the K-mount. It may happen, guys. Pentax changed mounts once > before, and might change again. If Pentax wants to adopt modern lens > design with HSM and IF technology, changing mounts might be more > profitable than designing around the limitations of the K-mount. Theres no reason for dropping the K-mount. Its fully compatible with USM and IS. However, making asmaller digital slr system may make sense. > But I truly think Pentax in no longer interested in anything except > the "upscale demographics", and will focus not on professional or even > serious photographers, but instead on aspiring yuppies who want to > take pictures with a camera they think will impress somebody, if only > themselves. Sort of a poor boys Contax. Regardless what you call them, Pentax have discovered that a significant part of their consumerbase consist of connoisseurs willing to pay premium prices for premium products. Just look at the LX users and their willingness to pay high dollar for old lenses. Not taking advantage of this fact will be ignoring their customers
Re: PZ-1p review
Bruce wrote: > I suspect that the most that can be said is the PZ-1p was not as > successful as any of us would have liked. How successful the MZ-S > will be remains to be seen. The MZ-S isn't designed to be sold in large volumes. Its a fine camera more in common wit the LX and the MX. > John may be correct in that Pentax may never be able to compete again > with the top end Nikon/Canon offerings. Maybe they are best served in > a more upscale connoisseur market. Many times what is right for a > company is not the most right direction for the current users. If > Pentax has to go a direction that doesn't suit some or most of us, > they will have to weigh the loss of those old users versus future > sales. But a significan't part of those Pentax users not buying the Z-1p used a fortune on expensive LX'es and lenses. The Z-1p users weren't willing to pay so Pentax weren't willing to serve them anymore. 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
In a message dated 12/26/2001 11:05:15 PM US Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In a message dated 12/26/2001 6:06:42 PM US Eastern Standard Time, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > >>And part because it looks like an ungainly brick. > > > > Have you taken the trouble to look closely at the competition? > > This silly question, which I take as an intended cute insult, is the > equivalent of telling me I should not judge one dog ugly until I go and > look at the other ugly, possibly uglier, dogs on the next block. So > what. That is not at all relevant to my observations. > > Bob > With no intent to be insulting and no intent to defend the PZ1/PZ1p's beauty or lack thereof - My PZ1p's accomplish what I want within my own ability to create images. This would seem to be the only relevant factor. Granted, I "like" the appearance of my old K2's and the earlier Spotmatics more. In any case, both your judgements and mine are subjective. My point was simply that few, if any, of the modern plastic wonders are things of beauty. Regards, Ed M. - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
>spiffs I take it that a 'spiff' is some sort of perk? It's not in my sland repertoire unfortunately... Cheers, Cotty ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads http://www.macads.co.uk - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Well even though I LOVE LOVE LOVE my PZ-1p, if a BIG BAD 67II came along and ate it on the way to grandmother's house, I wouldn't mind... as long as it didn't hurt it too bad! Tom C. - Original Message - From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 9:33 PM Subject: Re: PZ-1p review > > But both are lower than the 6x7 on the food chain. > HAR!! > William Robb - 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 .
RE: Re: PZ-1p review
It is not in answer to your question, but an observation on some shops here in NYC. Electronic shops abound here and I could not help but look in the windows to see if they had any Pentax cameras. I saw the occasional ZX-70 or such, and a few ZX-5n but I was surprised to see a number of ZX-5 cameras on display. Definitely not grey market but you can see how many cameras they move through these shops. One was sad, it had a definite film of dust, you knew it had been there for quite a while. César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida last day in NYC > -Original Message- > From: David Brooks [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 10:54 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Re: PZ-1p review > > Rob.How recently did Pentax stop production of the PZ-1p?? > I'm saving up for eithr the MZ5n or PZ-1p,and i see the 5n still for > sale in our big shops but have not realy noticed if the have any 1p's on > the > shelf. > > Thanks > > Dave > > > 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. > > Rob > > _ > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > - > 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 . > > > End Original Message > > > > Pentax User > Stouffville Ontario Canada > > Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail > - > 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 . - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
> (But the MX must take second place to the LX.) > > Bob But both are lower than the 6x7 on the food chain. HAR!! William Robb - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
John wrote: > ...and some of us regret replacing the top model PZ1p with the > mid-range MZ-S. In my opinion, history will judge the MZ-S as an > overpriced yuppie-pretending-to-be-artist's toy, much like the Contax > G1 or N1. > I love this quote from a G1 reviewer, which in my mind also sums up > the Contax N1 and Pentax MZ-S: "The exact application for which this > camera was designed is unclear, except that price and availability > point to a decidedly upscale demographic." This reviewer must be a certified idiot. On thing is not understanding the purpose of the MZ-S, which in my opinion is not understanding the concept of Pentax, another thing is not understanding the point with the G1. Even if I don't care about rangefinders, the G1is essence of Contax. The recipe that made Contax famous. And Contaxes were never cheap. > It is not surprising to hear MZ-S owners proclaim its lack of features > as a desirable feature in itself, because they never could figure out > how to successfully and easily access the useful features of a > previous camera. Which is total nonsense. The MZ-S is the most featured Pentax camera ever with a considerable margin. The fact that some people insist that it has less features than the Z-1p doesn't make it true. It has traded slightly lower max shutter speed and FPS rate for smaller size something thats always been well received in the Pentax community. And don't get me that argument of flash synch; the MZ-S synch at 1/6000s for those who bothers to use the flashes designed for it. 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001 20:51:48 +0100, you wrote: >Some of us actually celebrated the demise of the Z-1p ...and some of us regret replacing the top model PZ1p with the mid-range MZ-S. In my opinion, history will judge the MZ-S as an overpriced yuppie-pretending-to-be-artist's toy, much like the Contax G1 or N1. I love this quote from a G1 reviewer, which in my mind also sums up the Contax N1 and Pentax MZ-S: "The exact application for which this camera was designed is unclear, except that price and availability point to a decidedly upscale demographic." It is not surprising to hear MZ-S owners proclaim its lack of features as a desirable feature in itself, because they never could figure out how to successfully and easily access the useful features of a previous camera. And come on guys - is the MZ-S really all that well built? I mean, does it have weather sealing that will hold back a piddling fog? Is it sealed as well as the EOS 1v? Or do we drag out the price-performance argument when comparing the EOS 1v and MZ-S, and in the next breath loudly proclaim that the PZ1p is "bad" because the PZ1p provides excellent value for the money? Does anyone really think Pentax did not leave room for an improved model MZ-Sn, for example something with faster max shutter speed, faster flash sync, and maybe a couple of other features? Or, more likely, isn't it true that the MZ-S only exists at all because Pentax needed a design frame for their digital camera? Introducing a new model such as the MZ-S as the be-all and end-all of Pentax film cameras would go against the obvious current and ancient history of Pentax design. The PZ1p does not have a direct upgrade because Pentax fell out of competition against Nikon and Canon and Minolta in the mid and upper range AF camera *systems*, not because of any fault in the design of the PZ1p itself. If anything, they made the Pz1 too good; and the improved Pz1p too good, and failed to reach the next level with an upgraded Pz1p because ot system issues, and because Pentax side-tracked themselves with selling point-and-shoots, and selling upscale point-and-shoots like the whole MZ series. As for price-performance, well, Pentax has a long and honorable history of providing good value for camera buyers, going at least back to the Spotmatic era and continuing through today. Back then, Pentax priced three different sets with only a ten or twenty dollar difference between each level. Remember Pentax is the manufacturer who hung a ring around an f1.8 lens to cut its max aperture back to f2, so some poor schmuck could afford to buy a Pentax kit ten bucks cheaper, with no serious compromise in quality. In my mind, there's only three reasons to own Pentax at all: first is the excellent Pentax glass, with its first-rate coatings. Second is related to the first: backwards compatibliity with fine older lenses. But the real kicker is value for money. If I had unlimited funds, and became convinced Canon lenses would please me as well as my Pentax lenses, I switch tomorrow. Or, more likely, I would have switched a long time ago. The PZ1p is a fine camera in the hands of anyone not looking for a yuppie toy to make themselves feel good about owning "a fine piece of machinery." If one is looking for a camera to impress those who know nothing, a Pz1p works just as well as an MZ-S. If one is looking for a camera to take pictures, the Pz1p outperforms the MZ-S. And if anyone thinks the MZ-S is all that great, just wait til Pentax dumps the K-mount. It may happen, guys. Pentax changed mounts once before, and might change again. If Pentax wants to adopt modern lens design with HSM and IF technology, changing mounts might be more profitable than designing around the limitations of the K-mount. But I truly think Pentax in no longer interested in anything except the "upscale demographics", and will focus not on professional or even serious photographers, but instead on aspiring yuppies who want to take pictures with a camera they think will impress somebody, if only themselves. Sort of a poor boys Contax. The bad thing is, Pentax is again way behind the market. Being a yuppy went out with the dot coms. -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
In a message dated 12/26/2001 6:06:42 PM US Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > And part because it looks like an ungainly brick. > > Bob > - > Have you taken the trouble to look closely at the competition? Ed M - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
John, I like my PZ-1. I picked up a PZ-1p as some of the pdml members moved up to the new MZ-S's and think it is an even better camera. The PZ-1 has a totally different feel and operation from the Super Program that I used extensively before it. The PZ-1p has a totally different feel and operation than the LX I am using now. I enjoy the difference and it helps me be aware of what kind of camera I'm using - automatic or manual. I don't really understand Paal's or Bob H's problems with the PZ-1p. But John, I've looked at some of your work on the web, it's really good, and when your PZ-1p starts holding you back, you let us know...will ya! Regards, Bob S. John ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) quoted and wrote: << > When I heard the news that the PZ-1p was officially out > of production, I, however, silently drank some homemade chianti. ... and I, completely sober and thoughtful, went out and bought a new PZ1p (number three) to store away for the future. Since two PZ1p's and a manual camera (LX or ME Super) are my standard kit, having a third PZ1p for backup makes sense to me.>> - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001 10:04:53 -0500, you wrote: > When I heard the news >that the PZ-1p was officially out of production, I, however, silently drank >some homemade chianti. ... and I, completely sober and thoughtful, went out and bought a new PZ1p (number three) to store away for the future. Since two PZ1p's and a manual camera (LX or ME Super) are my standard kit, having a third PZ1p for backup makes sense to me. -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
aimcompute wrote: > Oh shutup Pal, Why should he shut up? He makes perfect sense on, this issue at least. > Not only many of us, but other camera reviewers don't agree with you. These delusions tend to attract crowds. :) I share Pal's views but shut up about the Z1/Z1-p a long time ago, shouted down by the sycophants. > The fact it didn't do well may be part marketing, part Nikon/Canon mentality > of the consumer-masses. And part because it looks like an ungainly brick. Bob - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
wendy beard wrote: > At 16:04 26-12-2001 -0500, Tom C. wrote: > I have never, ever seen a (P)Z-1 or (P)Z1-p in the flesh and I've been > in a lot of camera shops in my time! Lucky you, :) Bob - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
I recall one other time, asking at a chain camera store, whether they had a PZ-1p in stock. They said "Yes we do". I said "Where is it? I don't see it". They said "We don't put it out on the shelf. We only have one of them". How's that for a sales strategy? Tom C. - Original Message - From: "wendy beard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 2:58 PM Subject: Re: PZ-1p review > At 16:04 26-12-2001 -0500, Tom C. wrote: > >The fact it didn't do well may be part marketing, part Nikon/Canon mentality > >of the consumer-masses. > > I should say definitely some sort of marketing failure. > I have never, ever seen a (P)Z-1 or (P)Z1-p in the flesh and I've been in a > lot of camera shops in my time! > I briefly owned a Z-70 which is probably on a par with the Z-1 in the looks > department. Great camera to use, but wouldn't win any prizes in a beauty > contest. Come to think of it, don't see many of those around either. > I think Pentax found their way again with the introduction of the ZX/MZ series. > > The Canon/Nikon mentality is thriving as illustrated by my old colleague. > He wanted to buy an SLR to replace his old praktica and asked my advice. I > duly gave it. He still came back with a Nikon F65. He'd been swayed by the > swanky name. > > Wendy > > --- > Wendy Beard > Ottawa, Canada > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > - > 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 . - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
>I should say definitely some sort of marketing failure. >I have never, ever seen a (P)Z-1 or (P)Z1-p in the flesh and I've been in a >lot of camera shops in my time! IMO Pentax should gave away at least one Z-1/Z-1p to every local retailers in the 1st place for promotional purpose. :) regards, Alan Chan _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Wendy, Prior to purchasing my PZ-1p in '98 (I've told this story before), the salesman was very interested in selling me a N90s. When I asked to look at the Pentax, he basically handed it to me and didn't tell me a thing about it or make any attempts to sell it. In fact he was more interested in selling me ANY Nikon model over the PZ-1p. I rewarded that by purchasing it mail order. I've seen PZ-1p's frequently in camera stores, but many times the advertised price is close to list (800 USD). It's been said before that the salesperson's perk for selling other brands is higher than that of selling a Pentax.It seems like a deliberate attempt on the salesperson's part not to sell the camera. Tom C. - Original Message - From: "wendy beard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 2:58 PM Subject: Re: PZ-1p review > At 16:04 26-12-2001 -0500, Tom C. wrote: > >The fact it didn't do well may be part marketing, part Nikon/Canon mentality > >of the consumer-masses. > > I should say definitely some sort of marketing failure. > I have never, ever seen a (P)Z-1 or (P)Z1-p in the flesh and I've been in a > lot of camera shops in my time! > I briefly owned a Z-70 which is probably on a par with the Z-1 in the looks > department. Great camera to use, but wouldn't win any prizes in a beauty > contest. Come to think of it, don't see many of those around either. > I think Pentax found their way again with the introduction of the ZX/MZ series. > > The Canon/Nikon mentality is thriving as illustrated by my old colleague. > He wanted to buy an SLR to replace his old praktica and asked my advice. I > duly gave it. He still came back with a Nikon F65. He'd been swayed by the > swanky name. > > Wendy - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
At 16:04 26-12-2001 -0500, Tom C. wrote: >The fact it didn't do well may be part marketing, part Nikon/Canon mentality >of the consumer-masses. I should say definitely some sort of marketing failure. I have never, ever seen a (P)Z-1 or (P)Z1-p in the flesh and I've been in a lot of camera shops in my time! I briefly owned a Z-70 which is probably on a par with the Z-1 in the looks department. Great camera to use, but wouldn't win any prizes in a beauty contest. Come to think of it, don't see many of those around either. I think Pentax found their way again with the introduction of the ZX/MZ series. The Canon/Nikon mentality is thriving as illustrated by my old colleague. He wanted to buy an SLR to replace his old praktica and asked my advice. I duly gave it. He still came back with a Nikon F65. He'd been swayed by the swanky name. Wendy --- Wendy Beard Ottawa, Canada mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
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
Re: PZ-1p review
I just happen to have a PZ-1p for sale. It has the Golden Section screen installed and the Grip Strap attached. $300 plus shipping. Doug At 12:08 PM 12/26/01 -0500, you wrote: I'm not sure of the exact date when production ceased. Paal Jensen mentioned it a while back. It's hard to find this sort of thing out officially - Pentax USA recently told me it is still a current model. They may still have back-stock at Pentax. The PZ-1p is certainly still available new in many large mail-order shops. B&H and Adorama were already mentioned, and most ads in POP Photo still list it. I figure I certainly have at least 6 months (perhaps a year or more, but I want to play it safe) before they become difficult to find. (I bought a K1000 new in 2000 and I think they stopped making those in '97...I did overpay for it though.) The PZ-1ps are rarely "on the shelf" but that doesn't mean they are unavailable. (How many were on the shelf even back in '95 and '96?) As far as I know the ZX-5n (MZ-5n) is still very current. They've just announced the MZ-6, apparently to replace the ZX-7 (MZ-7), and one could guess that they may release another similar MZ camera to replace the 5n/3 at some point. I guess if you're leaning toward the PZ-1p (which would be my recommendation) then act fairly soon; but if you are leaning toward the MZ-5n, you probably have a couple years before they dry up. Rob Ashwood Lake Photography http://www.alphoto.com - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
I'm not sure of the exact date when production ceased. Paal Jensen mentioned it a while back. It's hard to find this sort of thing out officially - Pentax USA recently told me it is still a current model. They may still have back-stock at Pentax. The PZ-1p is certainly still available new in many large mail-order shops. B&H and Adorama were already mentioned, and most ads in POP Photo still list it. I figure I certainly have at least 6 months (perhaps a year or more, but I want to play it safe) before they become difficult to find. (I bought a K1000 new in 2000 and I think they stopped making those in '97...I did overpay for it though.) The PZ-1ps are rarely "on the shelf" but that doesn't mean they are unavailable. (How many were on the shelf even back in '95 and '96?) As far as I know the ZX-5n (MZ-5n) is still very current. They've just announced the MZ-6, apparently to replace the ZX-7 (MZ-7), and one could guess that they may release another similar MZ camera to replace the 5n/3 at some point. I guess if you're leaning toward the PZ-1p (which would be my recommendation) then act fairly soon; but if you are leaning toward the MZ-5n, you probably have a couple years before they dry up. Rob >Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 10:53:56 -0500 >From: "David Brooks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Re: PZ-1p review > >Rob.How recently did Pentax stop production of the PZ-1p?? >I'm saving up for eithr the MZ5n or PZ-1p,and i see the 5n still for >sale in our big shops but have not realy noticed if the have any 1p's >on >the >shelf. > >Thanks _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com - 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 .
RE: PZ-1p review
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. Rob --- According to Pentax US, the PZ-1p has not been discontinued, and it is still in production. I too love this camera. I am now a full-time pj at a daily paper. The question came up as to wether I would switch to digital in the near future. As much as I would like to switch to digital, unless they come out with a PZ-1d I doubt that I would right away. I still think that there will eventually be a company that will be able to convert film cameras to digital. At least I really hope so. Nick - 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 .
Re: Re: PZ-1p review
Rob.How recently did Pentax stop production of the PZ-1p?? I'm saving up for eithr the MZ5n or PZ-1p,and i see the 5n still for sale in our big shops but have not realy noticed if the have any 1p's on the shelf. Thanks Dave 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. Rob _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx - 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 . End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Lately, PHOTOgraphic has been giving some belated credit to the PZ-1p. They even listed it in the last issue as one of their five favorite cameras under $500, which I found surprising. I personally love the PZ-1p and can't really imagine a better all-around camera. The ergonomics, as has already been pointed out, couldn't be better. The feel of the camera in my hands is simply the best thing I've ever felt. The Hyper modes concept is a brilliant one - something that would be difficult now for me to lose. I can't imagine getting so much enjoyment out of any other object, let alone camera. 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. It's hard for me see how the PZ-1p is considered ugly - especially when set alongside the MZ-S. The cover of PHOTOgraphic displays the five sub-$500 cameras - and the PZ-1p certainly isn't the worst looking. I have no problem with the looks of the Maxxum 9 though, either, which is generally considered awful to look at...so maybe I have strange notions of what constitutes attractiveness. May main dilemma is how many more PZ-1ps to buy before they disappear altogether. It seems clear that Pentax, as all other companies, will go almost entirely digital in order to survive. Room is left for perhaps one more film flagship, and it seems to make sense that it would be in the retro-style not unlike the LX-II suggested previously by Pal. I'll likely buy one (particularly if the build quality exceeds the PZ-1p, and especially if it exceeds the MZ-S and includes weather sealing), but it seems certain the specs won't match the PZ-1p. With the MZ-S coming in under the PZ-1p in specs in most regards apart from build quality, what this means is that the PZ-1p will end up having been the best, most well-spec'd, pro-caliber 35mm SLR Pentax ever produced. Hence, the more I can buy now the better off I'll be years from now. 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. Rob _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Gary L. Murphy wrote: > I guess, like people, some objects are more photogenic than others, and the > (P)Z-1p is one example of this... The Z-1p looks a lot better without that ugly 28-80 lens you see in most of the pictures. Cheers, - Dave David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec) http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ "Why is it that if an adult behaves like a child they lock him up, while children are allowed to run free on the streets?" -- Garfield - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Hyper-program modes sound v-e-r-y nice, and "snap-in focus" and the optional "golden section finder screen" are making me more than a little drooly. At the moment, my finances could probably swing a "Pentax Spit-Bib (size adult)". I'm happy with my ZX-5n... I'm happy with my ZX-5n... I'm happy with my ZX-5n... Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tom C. wrote: >Hi Dan, > >IMO, the PZ-1p is a real sleeper of a camera. It was never pushed by most >camera salesman. It basically had all the specs of an N8008s when it came >out, + a built-in flash. It still is close to $750 < a N90s with a flash. >The light up LCD is great at night, just wish you could toggle it on & off >with one button push, instead of needing to push two buttons for a 20 sec? >on-time. > >Even though some have not liked it's looks, I have always thought it was >nice looking and while many don't like it's brickiness, it only takes a >couple of times out with it to fall in love with the ergonomics. > >I haven't held the MZ-S, but I have never held a camera that felt better in >the hand than a PZ-1p. > >The AF has not failed to live up to my expectations. I never expect it to >work perfectly in ALL conditions. I expect it to work correctly most of the >time and that it has done. When using MF lenses, the focus confirmation is >a NICE feature. > >Lot's and lots of other nice things like the Hyper-program modes. Two sec >mirror lockup, IF button. > >To use it is to love it. > >Tom C. - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
>I could not agree more. When I first saw a picture of the PZ-1p I had the >same first impressions. "Man, who >would ever be caught out with a camera that looked like that?" After I went >to the camera store and saw it "in >person" and held it, it was "love" at first sight. I've never looked back >since When I first saw the Z-1 in magazine I also thought it was one ugly camera. But somehow the actual Z-1/Z-1p looks better in its 3D form than on a 2D paper. Don't know why. regards, Alan Chan _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
On Mon, 24 Dec 2001 10:54:49 -0700, aimcompute wrote: >I haven't held the MZ-S, but I have never held a camera that felt better in >the hand than a PZ-1p. >To use it is to love it. Tom, I could not agree more. When I first saw a picture of the PZ-1p I had the same first impressions. "Man, who would ever be caught out with a camera that looked like that?" After I went to the camera store and saw it "in person" and held it, it was "love" at first sight. I've never looked back since Later, Gary - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
Hi Dan, IMO, the PZ-1p is a real sleeper of a camera. It was never pushed by most camera salesman. It basically had all the specs of an N8008s when it came out, + a built-in flash. It still is close to $750 < a N90s with a flash. The light up LCD is great at night, just wish you could toggle it on & off with one button push, instead of needing to push two buttons for a 20 sec? on-time. Even though some have not liked it's looks, I have always thought it was nice looking and while many don't like it's brickiness, it only takes a couple of times out with it to fall in love with the ergonomics. I haven't held the MZ-S, but I have never held a camera that felt better in the hand than a PZ-1p. The AF has not failed to live up to my expectations. I never expect it to work perfectly in ALL conditions. I expect it to work correctly most of the time and that it has done. When using MF lenses, the focus confirmation is a NICE feature. Lot's and lots of other nice things like the Hyper-program modes. Two sec mirror lockup, IF button. To use it is to love it. Tom C. - Original Message - From: "Dan Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 8:09 PM Subject: PZ-1p review > Just ran across this > > http://www.photographic.com/showarchives.cgi?93:3 > > and found it very interesting. It reviews the PZ-1p, a camera I've heard > much about on the list, but never seen. Makes me a little envious, > actually. > > Dan Scott > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - > 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 . - 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 .
OT: Re: PZ-1p review
- Original Message - From: "Artur Ledóchowski" Subject: Odp: PZ-1p review >> > > > I thought the Nikon F's were ugly. > > They are, indeed:)) Especially F5, F4 and F3:)) Surely not the F3, with it's stylish red pinstriping!!! L8R Bill - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
In a message dated 12/23/2001 7:51:07 AM US Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > I think the PZ1p's downfall is simple. It is not a photogenic camera. > In actual use, it is beautiful, but catalog-size photos of it are > quite ugly. Who the heck would give a second look at an ugly camera? > > -- > John Mustarde > www.photolin.com > ...the eye of the beholder... I thought the Nikon F's were ugly. Regards, Ed M. - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p review
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 21:09:35 -0600, you wrote: >Just ran across this > >http://www.photographic.com/showarchives.cgi?93:3 > >and found it very interesting. It reviews the PZ-1p, a camera I've heard >much about on the list, but never seen. Makes me a little envious, >actually. > I think the PZ1p's downfall is simple. It is not a photogenic camera. In actual use, it is beautiful, but catalog-size photos of it are quite ugly. Who the heck would give a second look at an ugly camera? -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com - 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 .
RE: PZ-1p vs. ZX-5n
The grip is the main reason I always gave the Z-1p a pass. Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Richard Seaman Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 3:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PZ-1p vs. ZX-5n Timothy, I bought a ZX-M soon after they were introduced, and I've had the same ZX-5 body for about 5 years. I just got a Z-1 a day or two ago, and haven't even had a chance to put film through it yet, but I can give some immediate impressions. The TTL flash was the main reason I replaced my Super-A with the ZX-5, and I haven't been disappointed. Of course there have been occasions where the shot has been under-exposed, but I can always see why it happened and why I should have dialed in some exposure compensation. A full 99% of the time, though, I just put it into spot metering mode and fire away, using a powerful AF-500FTZ because my subjects are often 30 feet or more away. I do a lot of nature photography (insects and birds and anything else which looks interesting), and I use an awful lot of flash, so I've had plenty of time to learn whether the metering is good or not. I can't comment on the flash metering accuracy of the Z-1, because I haven't used it yet, but the ZX-5 seems good. I got the Z-1 solely because it has the 1/250 flash sync, but if you're not doing the type of long-range nature photography I do then this is unlikely to be any better than the ZX-5's 1/100 flash. Two things stood out when I started handling the Z-1: (1) compared to a ZX-M or ZX-5, this is one bulky and heavy brute! I don't know the actual figures, but the ZX-5 seems only slightly heavier to me than the ZX-M; however, the Z-1 is much heavier. On the Z-1, the shutter release is located near the front of a very large grip which extends almost an inch forward from the camera body. I'm not sure how well I'll cope with this, because I have carpal tunnel problems in my right hand. Even for an unafflicted user, it's very bulky, though I'm sure not more than most Canon, Nikon and other cameras. Time will tell if this is a real issue for me, or not; (2) the Z-1 is far more complex and less intuitive to use than the ZX-5. The ZX-5 is virtually identical to the ZX-M, and has always had everything I wanted. Even setting the shutter speed on the Z-1 isn't obvious, though I'm sure I'll soon get used to it. Check to see whether any of the 18 Pentax Functions appeal to you, otherwise they won't add anything to your photographic experience. For myself, I can imagine using the Image Size Tracking feature, at least if I had a long auto lens to do it with! Of course the Z-1's extra size, weight and complexity do make one feel more professional and give one an undeniable ego boost ;^) You'll soon be winking as much as those LX users 8^O For you, a point in favor of the ZX-5 over the Z-1 is that the ZX-5 uses the same batteries as the ZX-M, whereas the PZ-1 uses a single 2CR5. If you continue to use the ZX-M, then you'll be buying and carrying two sets of batteries, plus spares. I focus manually even with my auto-focus lens (SMC Pentax-FA 100mm f2.8 and Sigma 15-35mm), so I can't comment on the auto-focus ability of any of these bodies - but I do know that the ZX-M is lousy at auto-focus, and the built-in flash isn't much good, either! As far as sturdiness is concerned, both the ZX-5 and the PZ-1p are much, much more solid than a ZX-M. I'm mostly thinking about the solidness of the body, but it's also true of the cosmetics - very soon after I got my ZX-M, fully one half of the right hand dial was blank, because the shutter speed numbers wore off! I'm also having to do some testing to see whether the mirror is locating properly, because it seems like I might be having trouble focussing accurately (I'm not sure if this is real or just imagined until I've completed the tests). I treat my equipment pretty roughly, backpacking it around the planet, throwing unpadded lenses and bodies together and so on, and in the five years I've had the ZX-5 I've never had any problems, apart from the 1/60th lens issue I mentioned in recent emails - and even that problem seems to have spontaneously vanished. My understanding is that the PZ-1P is in a different league than the ZX-5 for sturdiness, I think the PZ-1 has a metal body versus the ZX-5's polycarbonate, but I could well be wrong on that. But it doesn't really matter unless you're going to be extremely severe with the camera, because as I say, even the ZX-5 has taken an awful lot of punishment from me. I've put together a quick page with the three camera bodies on it, with comments, as well as the Pentax Function chart Bob kindly supplied to me: http://www.richard-seaman.com/Me/Photography/CameraBodies/index.html If you want to check the flash metering of the ZX-5, look at the following page; almost all of the insect photos were taken with the flash as primary light source:
Re: PZ-1p vs. ZX-5n
I don't have an MZ-5, and I have never done any specific tests on the PZ-1p metering. I just know that after 2 1/2 years I am very happy with it. I also shoot slides, almost exclusively. The only times I have been surprised was in very difficult situations where I knew I needed something like a graduated filter and didn't have one with me. That wasn't metering it was film. I was particularly happy with it right after buying it and shooting pictures of my son while skiing, in user mode with predictive autofocus. Marvelous. Results were exactly what I wanted and expected. Tom C. - Original Message - From: "Carlos Royo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:17 AM Subject: Re: PZ-1p vs. ZX-5n > tom wrote about the Z1-P: > > PZ-1p: Faster FPS, and a very nice when you hit the shutter. You > > can control just about every camera function possible. Feels great with > > the grip, but is pretty big. Has flash compensation. Meter isn't as > > accurate as the 5n, but pretty good. > > > > I don't agree about the meter accuracy. I have the Z-1, which has the > same meter than the Z-1P, and it is by far much more accurate than the > meter in my MZ-5. I shoot slides mainly, and the MZ-5 tends to > overexpose in some situations. > > Regards, > > -- > Carlos Royo > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Zaragoza (Aragon) - Spain > -- > - > 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 . - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p vs. ZX-5n
tom wrote about the Z1-P: > PZ-1p: Faster FPS, and a very nice when you hit the shutter. You > can control just about every camera function possible. Feels great with > the grip, but is pretty big. Has flash compensation. Meter isn't as > accurate as the 5n, but pretty good. > I don't agree about the meter accuracy. I have the Z-1, which has the same meter than the Z-1P, and it is by far much more accurate than the meter in my MZ-5. I shoot slides mainly, and the MZ-5 tends to overexpose in some situations. Regards, -- Carlos Royo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Zaragoza (Aragon) - Spain -- - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p vs. ZX-5n
Timothy Sherburne wrote: > > Hello all.. > > Well, the last thread I started spun out of control like an SUV covered with > an American flag being driven by Lady Di's bodyguard while drinking exotic > cocktails and not wearing his seatbelt. How we got there from the legal > implications of street photography I'll never know, but that's what the List > is all about, right? Most certainly. > > Okay, so in the interest of staying as close to The List's Topic as > possible, I'd like to hear from those who regularly use the PZ-1p and > ZX/MZ-5n about the differences between these two bodies. I'd like any > comments, pros, cons, antidotes, et cetera. PZ-1p: Faster FPS, and a very nice when you hit the shutter. You can control just about every camera function possible. Feels great with the grip, but is pretty big. Has flash compensation. Meter isn't as accurate as the 5n, but pretty good. ZX-5n - Very small, laid out like a MF camera. Really nice and simple. Shutter lag is almost intolerable. Probably the same as your ZX-M? Can't control flash exposure directly, but using the exp. comp. works just as well for me. Not nearly as durable, IMO. I'm in the minority on this, but I never liked the grip. > > Right now, I'm working with a ZX-M which is fine except when it's time to > take snapshots. You all know what I'm talking about... Birthday parties, > walks to the park, blah blah. Basically, I've discovered that the ZX-M is > fine when working with static objects where you've got time to think about > and adjust for ambient or controlled lighting. However, when it's time to > shoot from the hip, I end up with lots of underexposed pix. You're saying the 2 segment meter is easily fooled? > > The two features I'm really looking for are TTL flash support and fast > autofocus. So, without further ado, please share your comments... Both have ttl, the 5n has better AF. The AF speed difference is marginal, though I believe the 5n is more accurate and hunts a little less. I have 2 PZ-1p's and a 5n, and they get used quite a bit. I'll be replacing the p's with MZ-S's when finances allow. I guess at this point they're for sale. tv - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p: 1995 versions v.s. last run units
"Otis Wright, Jr." wrote: > What sort of differences/problems might one expect to find between a > camera purchased in 1995 and one purchased 1999/2000. > > Thanks in advance. > > Otis Wright Bought mine new in March 1995 & it hasn't needed repairs yet. David S. - 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 .
Re: PZ-1p: 1995 versions v.s. last run units
I have 2 Pz-1p's, one bought in early 1998 and one bought new last year (it was a store demo, though.) I don't see any differences in them at all, aside from more scuff marks on the older one. - MCC At 03:41 PM 12/3/01 -0500, you wrote: >What sort of differences/problems might one expect to find between a >camera purchased in 1995 and one purchased 1999/2000. > >Thanks in advance. > >Otis Wright - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - - - - - - - - - Photos: http://www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - 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 .
