Re: ist 35mm

[alex wetmore]

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote:
> I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm camera and
> how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look very
> enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom functions

I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a year.

The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus, and
a different UI.  The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you set
aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the
camera.  The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog dials on
the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets shutter
speed.  The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but the
*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and
hyperprogram.  Those are two features that I never really thought
I'd care about until I owned a camera with them.  Now I pretty much
use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot.

I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they probably
don't fetch too much on the used market.  I also have an MX and think
I'd grab it if I was shooting film.

alex

Re: ist 35mm

[Joe Wilensky]

I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played 
with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages 
to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and 
screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an 
autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.

From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used 
market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series 
camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the 
MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is 
rarely found in North America, it seems.

Joe


On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote:
 I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm camera and
 how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look very
 enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom functions
I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a year.

The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus, and
a different UI.  The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you set
aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the
camera.  The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog dials on
the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets shutter
speed.  The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but the
*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and
hyperprogram.  Those are two features that I never really thought
I'd care about until I owned a camera with them.  Now I pretty much
use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot.
I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they probably
don't fetch too much on the used market.  I also have an MX and think
I'd grab it if I was shooting film.
alex


--

Joe Wilensky
Staff Writer
Communication and Marketing Services
1150 Comstock Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853-2601
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel: 607-255-1575
fax: 607-255-9873

Re: ist 35mm

[arnie]

Joe

i own a zx-5n and i'm pretty happy with it. the mount doesn't affect me
because both my lenses are fa. The question i have is whether the ist would
be an upgrade, and whether its worth the money.

arnie

- Original Message - 
From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: ist 35mm


> I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played
> with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages
> to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and
> screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an
> autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.
>
>  From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used
> market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series
> camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the
> MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is
> rarely found in North America, it seems.
>
> Joe
>
>
> >On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote:
> >>  I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm camera
and
> >>  how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look very
> >>  enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom functions
> >
> >I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a year.
> >
> >The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus, and
> >a different UI.  The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you set
> >aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the
> >camera.  The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog dials on
> >the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets shutter
> >speed.  The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but the
> >*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and
> >hyperprogram.  Those are two features that I never really thought
> >I'd care about until I owned a camera with them.  Now I pretty much
> >use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot.
> >
> >I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they probably
> >don't fetch too much on the used market.  I also have an MX and think
> >I'd grab it if I was shooting film.
> >
> >alex
>
>
> -- 
>
> Joe Wilensky
> Staff Writer
> Communication and Marketing Services
> 1150 Comstock Hall
> Cornell University
> Ithaca, NY 14853-2601
>
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> tel: 607-255-1575
> fax: 607-255-9873
>

Re: ist 35mm

[Bill Owens]

The *ist would not be an upgrade.  The *istD would be.

Bill

- Original Message - 
From: "arnie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 3:02 PM
Subject: Re: ist 35mm


> Joe
>
> i own a zx-5n and i'm pretty happy with it. the mount doesn't affect me
> because both my lenses are fa. The question i have is whether the ist
would
> be an upgrade, and whether its worth the money.
>
> arnie
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:43 AM
> Subject: Re: ist 35mm
>
>
> > I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played
> > with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages
> > to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and
> > screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an
> > autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.
> >
> >  From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used
> > market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series
> > camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the
> > MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is
> > rarely found in North America, it seems.
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
> > >On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote:
> > >>  I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm
camera
> and
> > >>  how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look very
> > >>  enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom functions
> > >
> > >I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a year.
> > >
> > >The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus, and
> > >a different UI.  The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you set
> > >aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the
> > >camera.  The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog dials on
> > >the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets shutter
> > >speed.  The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but the
> > >*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and
> > >hyperprogram.  Those are two features that I never really thought
> > >I'd care about until I owned a camera with them.  Now I pretty much
> > >use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot.
> > >
> > >I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they probably
> > >don't fetch too much on the used market.  I also have an MX and think
> > >I'd grab it if I was shooting film.
> > >
> > >alex
> >
> >
> > -- 
> >
> > Joe Wilensky
> > Staff Writer
> > Communication and Marketing Services
> > 1150 Comstock Hall
> > Cornell University
> > Ithaca, NY 14853-2601
> >
> > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > tel: 607-255-1575
> > fax: 607-255-9873
> >
>
>
>

Re: ist 35mm

[Steve Desjardins]

Wouldn't the new AF be considerably better on the *ist than the zx-5n? 
If AF matters, the $300 ist may be a good investment.


Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/10/03 03:12PM >>>
The *ist would not be an upgrade.  The *istD would be.

Bill

- Original Message - 
From: "arnie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 3:02 PM
Subject: Re: ist 35mm


> Joe
>
> i own a zx-5n and i'm pretty happy with it. the mount doesn't affect
me
> because both my lenses are fa. The question i have is whether the
ist
would
> be an upgrade, and whether its worth the money.
>
> arnie
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:43 AM
> Subject: Re: ist 35mm
>
>
> > I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't
played
> > with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The
advantages
> > to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and
> > screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an
> > autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.
> >
> >  From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used
> > market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series
> > camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know
the
> > MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it
is
> > rarely found in North America, it seems.
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
> > >On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote:
> > >>  I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm
camera
> and
> > >>  how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look
very
> > >>  enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom
functions
> > >
> > >I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a
year.
> > >
> > >The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus,
and
> > >a different UI.  The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you
set
> > >aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the
> > >camera.  The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog
dials on
> > >the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets
shutter
> > >speed.  The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but
the
> > >*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and
> > >hyperprogram.  Those are two features that I never really thought
> > >I'd care about until I owned a camera with them.  Now I pretty
much
> > >use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot.
> > >
> > >I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they
probably
> > >don't fetch too much on the used market.  I also have an MX and
think
> > >I'd grab it if I was shooting film.
> > >
> > >alex
> >
> >
> > -- 
> >
> > Joe Wilensky
> > Staff Writer
> > Communication and Marketing Services
> > 1150 Comstock Hall
> > Cornell University
> > Ithaca, NY 14853-2601
> >
> > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > tel: 607-255-1575
> > fax: 607-255-9873
> >
>
>
>

Re: ist 35mm

[Ryan K. Brooks]

And the flash. 

Steve Desjardins wrote:

Wouldn't the new AF be considerably better on the *ist than the zx-5n? 
If AF matters, the $300 ist may be a good investment.

Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540) 458-8873
FAX: (540) 458-8878
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

[EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/10/03 03:12PM >>>
   

The *ist would not be an upgrade.  The *istD would be.

Bill

- Original Message - 
From: "arnie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 3:02 PM
Subject: Re: ist 35mm

 

Joe

i own a zx-5n and i'm pretty happy with it. the mount doesn't affect
   

me
 

because both my lenses are fa. The question i have is whether the
   

ist
would
 

be an upgrade, and whether its worth the money.

arnie

- Original Message - 
From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: ist 35mm

   

I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't
 

played
 

with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The
 

advantages
 

to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and
screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an
autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.
From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used
market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series
camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know
 

the
 

MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it
 

is
 

rarely found in North America, it seems.

Joe

 

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote:
   

I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm
 

camera
 

and
   

how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look
 

very
 

enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom
 

functions
 

I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a
   

year.
 

The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus,
   

and
 

a different UI.  The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you
   

set
 

aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the
camera.  The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog
   

dials on
 

the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets
   

shutter
 

speed.  The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but
   

the
 

*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and
hyperprogram.  Those are two features that I never really thought
I'd care about until I owned a camera with them.  Now I pretty
   

much
 

use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot.

I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they
   

probably
 

don't fetch too much on the used market.  I also have an MX and
   

think
 

I'd grab it if I was shooting film.

alex
   

--

Joe Wilensky
Staff Writer
Communication and Marketing Services
1150 Comstock Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853-2601
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
tel: 607-255-1575
fax: 607-255-9873

 

   



 

Re: ist 35mm

[arnie]

thanks bill


- Original Message - 
From: "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: ist 35mm


> The *ist would not be an upgrade.  The *istD would be.
>
> Bill
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "arnie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 3:02 PM
> Subject: Re: ist 35mm
>
>
> > Joe
> >
> > i own a zx-5n and i'm pretty happy with it. the mount doesn't affect me
> > because both my lenses are fa. The question i have is whether the ist
> would
> > be an upgrade, and whether its worth the money.
> >
> > arnie
> >
> > - Original Message - 
> > From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:43 AM
> > Subject: Re: ist 35mm
> >
> >
> > > I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played
> > > with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages
> > > to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and
> > > screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an
> > > autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.
> > >
> > >  From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used
> > > market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series
> > > camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the
> > > MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is
> > > rarely found in North America, it seems.
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > >
> > > >On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote:
> > > >>  I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm
> camera
> > and
> > > >>  how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look
very
> > > >>  enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom functions
> > > >
> > > >I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a year.
> > > >
> > > >The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus,
and
> > > >a different UI.  The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you set
> > > >aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the
> > > >camera.  The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog dials
on
> > > >the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets shutter
> > > >speed.  The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but the
> > > >*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and
> > > >hyperprogram.  Those are two features that I never really thought
> > > >I'd care about until I owned a camera with them.  Now I pretty much
> > > >use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot.
> > > >
> > > >I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they probably
> > > >don't fetch too much on the used market.  I also have an MX and think
> > > >I'd grab it if I was shooting film.
> > > >
> > > >alex
> > >
> > >
> > > -- 
> > >
> > > Joe Wilensky
> > > Staff Writer
> > > Communication and Marketing Services
> > > 1150 Comstock Hall
> > > Cornell University
> > > Ithaca, NY 14853-2601
> > >
> > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > tel: 607-255-1575
> > > fax: 607-255-9873
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Re: ist 35mm

[Bill Owens]

It may be a good investment, but IMHO the ZX-5n and 35mm *ist are so similar
in features as to not make it worthwhile to consider it an upgrade, more of
a replacement.  Again, this is just my personal opinion.

Bill

- Original Message - 
From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: ist 35mm


> Wouldn't the new AF be considerably better on the *ist than the zx-5n?
> If AF matters, the $300 ist may be a good investment.
>
>
> Steven Desjardins
> Department of Chemistry
> Washington and Lee University
> Lexington, VA 24450
> (540) 458-8873
> FAX: (540) 458-8878
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/10/03 03:12PM >>>
> The *ist would not be an upgrade.  The *istD would be.
>
> Bill
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "arnie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 3:02 PM
> Subject: Re: ist 35mm
>
>
> > Joe
> >
> > i own a zx-5n and i'm pretty happy with it. the mount doesn't affect
> me
> > because both my lenses are fa. The question i have is whether the
> ist
> would
> > be an upgrade, and whether its worth the money.
> >
> > arnie
> >
> > - Original Message - 
> > From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:43 AM
> > Subject: Re: ist 35mm
> >
> >
> > > I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't
> played
> > > with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The
> advantages
> > > to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and
> > > screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an
> > > autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.
> > >
> > >  From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used
> > > market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series
> > > camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know
> the
> > > MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it
> is
> > > rarely found in North America, it seems.
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > >
> > > >On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote:
> > > >>  I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm
> camera
> > and
> > > >>  how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look
> very
> > > >>  enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom
> functions
> > > >
> > > >I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a
> year.
> > > >
> > > >The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus,
> and
> > > >a different UI.  The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you
> set
> > > >aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the
> > > >camera.  The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog
> dials on
> > > >the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets
> shutter
> > > >speed.  The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but
> the
> > > >*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and
> > > >hyperprogram.  Those are two features that I never really thought
> > > >I'd care about until I owned a camera with them.  Now I pretty
> much
> > > >use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot.
> > > >
> > > >I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they
> probably
> > > >don't fetch too much on the used market.  I also have an MX and
> think
> > > >I'd grab it if I was shooting film.
> > > >
> > > >alex
> > >
> > >
> > > -- 
> > >
> > > Joe Wilensky
> > > Staff Writer
> > > Communication and Marketing Services
> > > 1150 Comstock Hall
> > > Cornell University
> > > Ithaca, NY 14853-2601
> > >
> > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > tel: 607-255-1575
> > > fax: 607-255-9873
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: ist 35mm

[Herb Chong]

i have a ZX-5n and an *ist. i miss the power zoom and the slightly better
viewfinder on ZX-5n. otherwise, i prefer the *ist. if the ZX-5n had mirror
lockup, i think it would make the race closer. however, the ZX-5n is a very
functional camera and is capable of doing a fine job with taking a picture.

Herb...
- Original Message - 
From: "arnie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 7:56 AM
Subject: ist 35mm


> hey guys, just joined up here.
>
> I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm camera and
> how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look very
> enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom functions

Re: ist 35mm

[Peter Alling]

MZ-3 = ZX/MZ-5n (+ 1/4000 - 2s)(on dial).  Great camera but then so is the 5n.

At 11:51 AM 10/10/03, you wrote:
Hi Joe...

What's an MZ-3? Must be a European designation?
Discontinued now?
Never mind. I always do this. Visit Google.com, and find out all I need
to know...
The MZ-3 is not available in the U.S. - it is essentially ["all the
features of"] the MZ-5n, but with shutter speeds of 1/4000 and a flash
synch of 1/125 sec.
keith whaley

Joe Wilensky wrote:
>
> I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played
> with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages
> to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and
> screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an
> autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.
>
>  From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used
> market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series
> camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the
> MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is
> rarely found in North America, it seems.
>
[. . .]
I drink to make other people interesting.
-- George Jean Nathan  

Re: ist 35mm

[Paul]

and faster flash sync

Peter Alling wrote:

MZ-3 = ZX/MZ-5n (+ 1/4000 - 2s)(on dial).  Great camera but then so is 
the 5n.

At 11:51 AM 10/10/03, you wrote:

Hi Joe...

What's an MZ-3? Must be a European designation?
Discontinued now?
Never mind. I always do this. Visit Google.com, and find out all I need
to know...
The MZ-3 is not available in the U.S. - it is essentially ["all the
features of"] the MZ-5n, but with shutter speeds of 1/4000 and a flash
synch of 1/125 sec.
keith whaley

Joe Wilensky wrote:
>
> I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played
> with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages
> to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and
> screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an
> autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.
>
>  From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used
> market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series
> camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the
> MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is
> rarely found in North America, it seems.
>
[. . .]


I drink to make other people interesting.
-- George Jean Nathan 

Re: ist 35mm

[Peter Alling]

The *ist will give you superior autofocus, and a slightly better light meter
if I remember the specifications correctly.  It is smaller and lighter and the
battery grip has a vertical release, (a nice touch).  To get that you get 
slightly
more difficult manual focus, (air prism, not glass so the viewfinder isn't 
as bright),
smaller viewfinder with lower magnification and less coverage on the 
film.  Loss of the
use of the aperture ring in metered manual, (you use a multifunction dial 
on the body).
I think you lose the TTL flash during exposure but get P-TTL flash as well 
but that I'm
not sure that about.

At 03:02 PM 10/10/03, you wrote:
Joe

i own a zx-5n and i'm pretty happy with it. the mount doesn't affect me
because both my lenses are fa. The question i have is whether the ist would
be an upgrade, and whether its worth the money.
arnie

- Original Message -
From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: ist 35mm
> I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played
> with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages
> to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and
> screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an
> autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.
>
>  From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used
> market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series
> camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the
> MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is
> rarely found in North America, it seems.
>
> Joe
>
>
> >On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote:
> >>  I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm camera
and
> >>  how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look very
> >>  enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom functions
> >
> >I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a year.
> >
> >The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus, and
> >a different UI.  The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you set
> >aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the
> >camera.  The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog dials on
> >the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets shutter
> >speed.  The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but the
> >*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and
> >hyperprogram.  Those are two features that I never really thought
> >I'd care about until I owned a camera with them.  Now I pretty much
> >use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot.
> >
> >I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they probably
> >don't fetch too much on the used market.  I also have an MX and think
> >I'd grab it if I was shooting film.
> >
> >alex
>
>
> --
>
> Joe Wilensky
> Staff Writer
> Communication and Marketing Services
> 1150 Comstock Hall
> Cornell University
> Ithaca, NY 14853-2601
>
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> tel: 607-255-1575
> fax: 607-255-9873
>
I drink to make other people interesting.
-- George Jean Nathan  

Re: ist 35mm

[arnie]

all i need is a better autofocus and better metering. when shooting a family
gatherings, i dont have the time for the camera to hunt for focus, by the
time its done i missed the shot. and i dont have the time for doing all the
manual settings, or compensation. i need to be able to shoot and get a good
image. when i am at the top of the empire state building (as i was tonight)
then i have time to make sure the shot is exactly what i want.

also the advanced flash capability (p-ttl, wireless, contrast control synch)
is very useful for me.


- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 10:20 PM
Subject: Re: ist 35mm


> The *ist will give you superior autofocus, and a slightly better light
meter
> if I remember the specifications correctly.  It is smaller and lighter and
the
> battery grip has a vertical release, (a nice touch).  To get that you get
> slightly
> more difficult manual focus, (air prism, not glass so the viewfinder isn't
> as bright),
> smaller viewfinder with lower magnification and less coverage on the
> film.  Loss of the
> use of the aperture ring in metered manual, (you use a multifunction dial
> on the body).
> I think you lose the TTL flash during exposure but get P-TTL flash as well
> but that I'm
> not sure that about.
>
> At 03:02 PM 10/10/03, you wrote:
> >Joe
> >
> >i own a zx-5n and i'm pretty happy with it. the mount doesn't affect me
> >because both my lenses are fa. The question i have is whether the ist
would
> >be an upgrade, and whether its worth the money.
> >
> >arnie
> >
> >- Original Message -----
> >From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:43 AM
> >Subject: Re: ist 35mm
> >
> >
> > > I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played
> > > with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages
> > > to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and
> > > screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an
> > > autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.
> > >
> > >  From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used
> > > market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series
> > > camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the
> > > MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is
> > > rarely found in North America, it seems.
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > >
> > > >On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote:
> > > >>  I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the ist 35mm
camera
> >and
> > > >>  how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of the ist's features look
very
> > > >>  enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced flash, 17 custom functions
> > > >
> > > >I own both, although I really haven't used the ZX-5n in about a year.
> > > >
> > > >The *ist D is a little bigger, better built, has faster autofocus,
and
> > > >a different UI.  The ZX-5n UI is really the classic SLR UI, you set
> > > >aperature on the lens and shutter speed with a dial on top of the
> > > >camera.  The *ist D UI is the modern SLR UI, you have two jog dials
on
> > > >the body, one of which sets aperature and one of which sets shutter
> > > >speed.  The ZX-5n UI is really nice if you love classic SLRs, but the
> > > >*ist D UI has the advantages of supporting hypermanual and
> > > >hyperprogram.  Those are two features that I never really thought
> > > >I'd care about until I owned a camera with them.  Now I pretty much
> > > >use either hypermanual or hyperprogram for every shot.
> > > >
> > > >I should probably sell my ZX-5n, but I'm afraid that they probably
> > > >don't fetch too much on the used market.  I also have an MX and think
> > > >I'd grab it if I was shooting film.
> > > >
> > > >alex
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Joe Wilensky
> > > Staff Writer
> > > Communication and Marketing Services
> > > 1150 Comstock Hall
> > > Cornell University
> > > Ithaca, NY 14853-2601
> > >
> > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > tel: 607-255-1575
> > > fax: 607-255-9873
> > >
>
> I drink to make other people interesting.
>  -- George Jean Nathan
>

Re: ist 35mm

[Ramesh Kumar]

I am user of MZ5n. This weekend while doing landscape
photography, camera kept on hunting and was not able
to use AF. I was using 100mm lens.

I too feel I need better AF and *ist is a good choice.
But I will wait till the next generation of *ist. Next
generation of *ist may have good viewfinder, so that I
can manual AF.


Thanks
Ramesh
--- Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's a trade off, you get better auto-focus you lose
> in manual focus, if 
> you don't
> need the money I'd keep the ZX-5n and buy the *ist. 
> It's always good to 
> have a backup.
> 
> At 10:40 PM 10/13/03, you wrote:
> >all i need is a better autofocus and better
> metering. when shooting a family
> >gatherings, i dont have the time for the camera to
> hunt for focus, by the
> >time its done i missed the shot. and i dont have
> the time for doing all the
> >manual settings, or compensation. i need to be able
> to shoot and get a good
> >image. when i am at the top of the empire state
> building (as i was tonight)
> >then i have time to make sure the shot is exactly
> what i want.
> >
> >also the advanced flash capability (p-ttl,
> wireless, contrast control synch)
> >is very useful for me.
> >
> >
> >- Original Message -
> >From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 10:20 PM
> >Subject: Re: ist 35mm
> >
> >
> > > The *ist will give you superior autofocus, and a
> slightly better light
> >meter
> > > if I remember the specifications correctly.  It
> is smaller and lighter and
> >the
> > > battery grip has a vertical release, (a nice
> touch).  To get that you get
> > > slightly
> > > more difficult manual focus, (air prism, not
> glass so the viewfinder isn't
> > > as bright),
> > > smaller viewfinder with lower magnification and
> less coverage on the
> > > film.  Loss of the
> > > use of the aperture ring in metered manual, (you
> use a multifunction dial
> > > on the body).
> > > I think you lose the TTL flash during exposure
> but get P-TTL flash as well
> > > but that I'm
> > > not sure that about.
> > >
> > > At 03:02 PM 10/10/03, you wrote:
> > > >Joe
> > > >
> > > >i own a zx-5n and i'm pretty happy with it. the
> mount doesn't affect me
> > > >because both my lenses are fa. The question i
> have is whether the ist
> >would
> > > >be an upgrade, and whether its worth the money.
> > > >
> > > >arnie
> > > >
> > > >- Original Message -
> > > >From: "Joe Wilensky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:43 AM
> > > >Subject: Re: ist 35mm
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I think the question was about the *ist film
> camera. I haven't played
> > > > > with one, but I did recently pick up an
> MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages
> > > > > to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability
> with all K-mount (and
> > > > > screwmount) lenses and its classical
> interface, much like an
> > > > > autofocus combo between the MX and Super
> Program.
> > > > >
> > > > >  From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches
> quite a bit on the used
> > > > > market, as it is recognized as being the
> top-of-the-line ZX series
> > > > > camera with its spotmetering, bracketing,
> TTL flash, etc. I know the
> > > > > MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices
> reflect that), but it is
> > > > > rarely found in North America, it seems.
> > > > >
> > > > > Joe
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, arnie wrote:
> > > > > >>  I was wondering if anyone has any
> experience with the ist 35mm
> >camera
> > > >and
> > > > > >>  how it stacks up vs. the zx-5n. some of
> the ist's features look
> >very
> > > > > >>  enticing - 11 point autofocus, advanced
> flash, 17 custom functions
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I own both, although I really haven't used
> the ZX-5n in about a year.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >The *ist D is a little bigger, better
> built, has faster autofocus,
> >and

RE: *ist 35mm

[Bucky]

I played with one yesterday while discussing the D with my friend who works
at the local Enabler shop.  It's cute, I suppose, and handles nicely, but I
HATED the interface for setting shutter speed and aperture, having been used
to the Z1p's lovely layout (the Tv and Av wheels, echoed so considerately on
the *istD).  I do like the placement of the DOF preview feature, which, on
other bodies, has always seemed somewhat out of the way to me.

Another gripe I noticed in the few minutes I played with it was the loud
"P!!!" it makes when you release the shutter, almost like
the sound of those kiddies' toy cars with the flywheels and gears inside
them (you know, the ones where you push them on the table and get the
internal mechanism spinning, and then they keep going for a couple of yards
with all that energy stored in the flywheel).  Not bad outside or in crowded
places with lots of talking going on, but WAY too loud to be unobtrusive in
a quiet setting, and, subjectively, smacking of plastic and cheapness and
barely-adequate motors.

Now, as someone on this list has said (and I agree), plastic is not
automatically a cheap substitute anymore.  I am  a fan of *good* plastic
construction, for weight issues, resilience, and the like.  However, I don't
like the nagging feeling that the machine I'm using is fragile.

My preference would be to get a used MZ-5N or -3, although I am sure that
some will disagree.   I had a 5N for a couple of years, and it was supremely
intuitive in its interface, being essentially like the manual SLRs we're all
on such intimate terms with.  In the end, if you like how it feels and how
its interface works, then go for it, because that's all that matters.

BTW, the Batt. Grip makes it MUCH easier to handle, IMO.  I find the Pentax
bodies a little hard to deal with because of their small vertical
dimension - I like to have more space for my hand.


-Original Message-
From: Cari Spano [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19-Oct-03 15:56
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: *ist 35mm



Has anyone used the *ist 35mm camera? I currently own the SF1 which I
have had since about 1987 and I am thinking about buying a newer Pentax.
I would love to hear some input on it. I would love to have the *istd
but that is way out of my price range.

Thanks for your input,
Cari

RE: *ist 35mm

[Cari Spano]

Thanks for your input on the *ist. I will have to take a look at the
other cameras you suggested.
Cari

> -Original Message-
> From: Bucky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 7:20 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: *ist 35mm
> 
> I played with one yesterday while discussing the D with my friend who
> works
> at the local Enabler shop.  It's cute, I suppose, and handles nicely,
but
> I
> HATED the interface for setting shutter speed and aperture, having
been
> used
> to the Z1p's lovely layout (the Tv and Av wheels, echoed so
considerately
> on
> the *istD).  I do like the placement of the DOF preview feature,
which, on
> other bodies, has always seemed somewhat out of the way to me.
> 
> Another gripe I noticed in the few minutes I played with it was the
loud
> "P!!!" it makes when you release the shutter, almost
like
> the sound of those kiddies' toy cars with the flywheels and gears
inside
> them (you know, the ones where you push them on the table and get the
> internal mechanism spinning, and then they keep going for a couple of
> yards
> with all that energy stored in the flywheel).  Not bad outside or in
> crowded
> places with lots of talking going on, but WAY too loud to be
unobtrusive
> in
> a quiet setting, and, subjectively, smacking of plastic and cheapness
and
> barely-adequate motors.
> 
> Now, as someone on this list has said (and I agree), plastic is not
> automatically a cheap substitute anymore.  I am  a fan of *good*
plastic
> construction, for weight issues, resilience, and the like.  However, I
> don't
> like the nagging feeling that the machine I'm using is fragile.
> 
> My preference would be to get a used MZ-5N or -3, although I am sure
that
> some will disagree.   I had a 5N for a couple of years, and it was
> supremely
> intuitive in its interface, being essentially like the manual SLRs
we're
> all
> on such intimate terms with.  In the end, if you like how it feels and
how
> its interface works, then go for it, because that's all that matters.
> 
> BTW, the Batt. Grip makes it MUCH easier to handle, IMO.  I find the
> Pentax
> bodies a little hard to deal with because of their small vertical
> dimension - I like to have more space for my hand.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Cari Spano [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 19-Oct-03 15:56
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: *ist 35mm
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone used the *ist 35mm camera? I currently own the SF1 which I
> have had since about 1987 and I am thinking about buying a newer
Pentax.
> I would love to hear some input on it. I would love to have the *istd
> but that is way out of my price range.
> 
> Thanks for your input,
> Cari
> 

RE: *ist 35mm

[ernreed2]

Bucky posted (among many other things)
> 
> Another gripe I noticed in the few minutes I played with it was the loud
> "P!!!" it makes when you release the shutter, almost like
> the sound of those kiddies' toy cars with the flywheels and gears inside
> them (you know, the ones where you push them on the table and get the
> internal mechanism spinning, and then they keep going for a couple of yards
> with all that energy stored in the flywheel).  


It went "Zip" when it moved and "Pop" when it stopped,
"Whirrr" when it stood still
I never knew just what it was and I guess I never will.* 

... oh, right, this isn't the theme song thread ...
 never mind ...











*"The Marvelous Toy" recorded by Peter, Paul & Mary. Quoted with no permission 
from
anyone.

Re: *ist 35mm

[Stan Halpin]

There are children on the list that have no idea what you are talking about;
isn't it sad? I mentioned this line to my wife, she is now singing the full
lyrics, very nicely. Thanks for the reminder!

Stan

on 10/19/03 8:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Bucky posted (among many other things)
>> 
>> Another gripe I noticed in the few minutes I played with it was the loud
>> "P!!!" it makes when you release the shutter, almost like
>> the sound of those kiddies' toy cars with the flywheels and gears inside
>> them (you know, the ones where you push them on the table and get the
>> internal mechanism spinning, and then they keep going for a couple of yards
>> with all that energy stored in the flywheel).
> 
> 
> It went "Zip" when it moved and "Pop" when it stopped,
> "Whirrr" when it stood still
> I never knew just what it was and I guess I never will.*
> 
> ... oh, right, this isn't the theme song thread ...
>  never mind ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"The Marvelous Toy" recorded by Peter, Paul & Mary. Quoted with no permission
> from
> anyone.
> 
> 

RE: *ist 35mm

[Bucky]

Makes me think of the Irish Rovers.  How scary.

-Original Message-
From: Stan Halpin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19-Oct-03 19:12
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: *ist 35mm


There are children on the list that have no idea what you are talking about;
isn't it sad? I mentioned this line to my wife, she is now singing the full
lyrics, very nicely. Thanks for the reminder!

Stan

on 10/19/03 8:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Bucky posted (among many other things)
>>
>> Another gripe I noticed in the few minutes I played with it was the loud
>> "P!!!" it makes when you release the shutter, almost like
>> the sound of those kiddies' toy cars with the flywheels and gears inside
>> them (you know, the ones where you push them on the table and get the
>> internal mechanism spinning, and then they keep going for a couple of
yards
>> with all that energy stored in the flywheel).
>
>
> It went "Zip" when it moved and "Pop" when it stopped,
> "Whirrr" when it stood still
> I never knew just what it was and I guess I never will.*
>
> ... oh, right, this isn't the theme song thread ...
>  never mind ...
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *"The Marvelous Toy" recorded by Peter, Paul & Mary. Quoted with no
permission
> from
> anyone.
>
>

Re: *ist 35mm

[John Francis]

> 
> *"The Marvelous Toy" recorded by Peter, Paul & Mary

 ... amongst others, including Val Doonican & John Denver.

And, of course, the guy who wrote it:  Tom Paxton.

For an on-topic reference, see my May 01 PUG entry:

RE: *ist 35mm

[alex wetmore]

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003, Bucky wrote:
> I played with one yesterday while discussing the D with my friend who works
> at the local Enabler shop.  It's cute, I suppose, and handles nicely, but I
> HATED the interface for setting shutter speed and aperture, having been used
> to the Z1p's lovely layout (the Tv and Av wheels, echoed so considerately on
> the *istD).

Ouch.  I just assumed that the *ist had the same UI as the *ist D.
Why do these two cameras have the same name?  It seems like they have
nothing in common.

alex

Re: *ist 35mm

[Bill Owens]

This is pure speculation on my part, but it appears to me that the *ist 35mm
is a sort of hybrid between 35mm and digital.  Approximately the same size,
same mount, LCD on the back and other features similar to the *istD.  Almost
like the Pentax engineers started with somewhat of an idea of producing a
digital, based on their film experience, and ended up saying, "Hey, we're
about half way through this process and we've designed a small, compact film
camera, let's run it by the marketing department and see what happens".

Bill
- Original Message - 
From: "alex wetmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 10:49 PM
Subject: RE: *ist 35mm


> On Sun, 19 Oct 2003, Bucky wrote:
> > I played with one yesterday while discussing the D with my friend who
works
> > at the local Enabler shop.  It's cute, I suppose, and handles nicely,
but I
> > HATED the interface for setting shutter speed and aperture, having been
used
> > to the Z1p's lovely layout (the Tv and Av wheels, echoed so
considerately on
> > the *istD).
>
> Ouch.  I just assumed that the *ist had the same UI as the *ist D.
> Why do these two cameras have the same name?  It seems like they have
> nothing in common.
>
> alex
>
>

Re: *ist 35mm

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Bill Owens"
Subject: Re: *ist 35mm


> This is pure speculation on my part, but it appears to me that the *ist
35mm
> is a sort of hybrid between 35mm and digital.  Approximately the same
size,
> same mount, LCD on the back and other features similar to the *istD.
Almost
> like the Pentax engineers started with somewhat of an idea of producing a
> digital, based on their film experience, and ended up saying, "Hey, we're
> about half way through this process and we've designed a small, compact
film
> camera, let's run it by the marketing department and see what happens".
>
The two chassis are not the same size, and share no common parts. What we
are seeing is a "family resemblance".
As another example, I noticed the other day that a particular Ford
automobile seemed to have the same general nose shape as an F150 truck,
although there would be no common body parts between the two vehicles

William Robb

Re: *ist 35mm

[Boris Liberman]

Hi!

The two chassis are not the same size, and share no common parts. 
What we
are seeing is a "family resemblance".
As another example, I noticed the other day that a particular Ford
automobile seemed to have the same general nose shape as an F150 
truck,
although there would be no common body parts between the two vehicles

William Robb

That's funny, because I was under impression that *ist and *istD have 
something in common by development. This does not necessary has to be 
common chassis, but I thought that they are closer to one another than 
just two "family resemblant" members...

But I suppose here is where my mileage varied...

Boris

Re: *ist 35mm

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Boris Liberman"
Subject: Re: *ist 35mm


> Hi!
>
> >The two chassis are not the same size, and share no common parts.
> >What we
> >are seeing is a "family resemblance".
> >As another example, I noticed the other day that a particular Ford
> >automobile seemed to have the same general nose shape as an F150
> >truck,
> >although there would be no common body parts between the two vehicles
> >
> >William Robb
> >
>
> That's funny, because I was under impression that *ist and *istD have
> something in common by development. This does not necessary has to be
> common chassis, but I thought that they are closer to one another than
> just two "family resemblant" members...
>
> But I suppose here is where my mileage varied...

I was speaking purely of the two chassis'.
I am sure there are common parts on the two cameras.
As far as product development goes, I suspect that the same styling team did
the body design.

William Robb

Re: *ist 35mm

[Alin Flaider]

  The common parts are also the new developments: AF and meter subsytems,
  mount (or lack of :oT). Enough shared R&D to justify a film sibling
  for *istd.

  Servus,  Alin

Bill wrote:

WR> The two chassis are not the same size, and share no common parts. What we
WR> are seeing is a "family resemblance".
WR> As another example, I noticed the other day that a particular Ford
WR> automobile seemed to have the same general nose shape as an F150 truck,
WR> although there would be no common body parts between the two vehicles

Oldies, was: Re: *ist 35mm

[Bill Owens]

This all reminds me of a group that was popular in the UK during my brief
stint there many years ago: The Dubliners.

Bill

- Original Message - 
From: "Bucky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 10:23 PM
Subject: RE: *ist 35mm


> Makes me think of the Irish Rovers.  How scary.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Stan Halpin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 19-Oct-03 19:12
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: *ist 35mm
>
>
> There are children on the list that have no idea what you are talking
about;
> isn't it sad? I mentioned this line to my wife, she is now singing the
full
> lyrics, very nicely. Thanks for the reminder!
>
> Stan
>
> on 10/19/03 8:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Bucky posted (among many other things)
> >>
> >> Another gripe I noticed in the few minutes I played with it was the
loud
> >> "P!!!" it makes when you release the shutter, almost
like
> >> the sound of those kiddies' toy cars with the flywheels and gears
inside
> >> them (you know, the ones where you push them on the table and get the
> >> internal mechanism spinning, and then they keep going for a couple of
> yards
> >> with all that energy stored in the flywheel).
> >
> >
> > It went "Zip" when it moved and "Pop" when it stopped,
> > "Whirrr" when it stood still
> > I never knew just what it was and I guess I never will.*
> >
> > ... oh, right, this isn't the theme song thread ...
> >  never mind ...
> >
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *"The Marvelous Toy" recorded by Peter, Paul & Mary. Quoted with no
> permission
> > from
> > anyone.
> >
> >
>
>
>

RE: *ist (35mm) custom functions & 360FGZ flash

[John L]

Don,

You're an absolute genius

I feel so lame.  I now understand it.  The CF9 function actually controls the "pop up 
flash button" which in turn wirelessly controls the 360FGZ.  It's like using the 
camera as a wireless control module with a studio flash so you don't have to walk 
across the room. I get it now!  That's kinda handy.

The manual isn't real clear about which flash it's controlling.  It made it sound as 
though it changed the built-in flash operation and I kept firing the shutter like a 
dummy.

I'm sure I'll have more questions when I get down to using it w/ film.

Thanks again.
--
John Lingelbach
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"You're dumb as a mule and just as 
ugly!  And if a strange man asks 
to give you a ride, I'd say take 
it!"  - Grandpa Simpson to a Young 
Homer

RE: *ist (35mm) custom functions & 360FGZ flash

[Don Sanderson]

Don't feel bad, I don't think most Pentax manuals are clear about much of
anything.
Especially flash!

Don

> -Original Message-
> From: John L [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 5:19 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: *ist (35mm) custom functions & 360FGZ flash
>
>
> Don,
>
> You're an absolute genius
>
> I feel so lame.  I now understand it.  The CF9 function actually
> controls the "pop up flash button" which in turn wirelessly
> controls the 360FGZ.  It's like using the camera as a wireless
> control module with a studio flash so you don't have to walk
> across the room. I get it now!  That's kinda handy.
>
> The manual isn't real clear about which flash it's controlling.
> It made it sound as though it changed the built-in flash
> operation and I kept firing the shutter like a dummy.
>
> I'm sure I'll have more questions when I get down to using it w/ film.
>
> Thanks again.
> --
> John Lingelbach
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "You're dumb as a mule and just as
> ugly!  And if a strange man asks
> to give you a ride, I'd say take
> it!"  - Grandpa Simpson to a Young
> Homer

RE: *ist (35mm) custom functions & 360FGZ flash

[Don Sanderson]

I don't have my 360 here at the moment so I can't actually test this but;
If I remember correctly CF9 causes the "Flash Pop Up Button" to behave in 3
different ways, not the flash itself.
IOW the flash button can disable, fire once, or fire for modeling, the flash
when it is pushed in wireless mode.
Is this what you are trying, or are you hitting the *shutter release* and
seeing what the flash does?


Don

> -Original Message-
> From: John L [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 11:13 AM
> To: Pentax Disc
> Subject: *ist (35mm) custom functions & 360FGZ flash
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Maybe if someone has  the combination of *ist film camera & 360FGZ flash
> can help me answer this
>
> Got my new 360FGZ flash to go along w/ film *ist.  Custom Function 9
> deals with camera's flash pop button operation DURING wireless operation
> w/ 360 flash.
> (from the *ist manual, page 139)
> The options are
> 1 - disable built in flash
> 2 - discharge built in once for test
> 3 - discharge built in for modeling
>
> When I set any one of the options, nothing seems to change.
>
> 1 does NOT disable the built in flash. (And custom function 8, makes the
> built in flash either part of the exposure OR just a control flash
> before the main flash pop, so why would we want to disable the built in
> flash w/ CF9?)
>
> 2 doesn't do a test flash from the built in ( both flash go off, and I
> hear the shutter click and mirror go up, so i assume i've taken a
> picture, but i don't have any film in the camera yet)
>
> 3.  I don't get the modelling light from the built in.
>
> I've got the camera & flash set to same channel.  Both have the wireless
> setting engaged on body & flash.  What am I doing wrong?
>
>  Am i just dumb (don't answer that) or are these instructions just
> cryptic?  (I've figured out the other nuances of the flash & camera by
> reading between the lines of both instruction manuals, but don't seem to
> get this)
>
>
> Thank all for any help
>
> John
>

FS: MZ-3 QD body, practically new Re: ist 35mm

[Chris Brogden]

Not mine, but it belongs to an employee of Pentax Canada.  He started off
working in our store, then became our Pentax rep, and then got promoted to
head office.  He has an MZ-3 that he almost never used (I think he said he
put 2 or 3 rolls through it in total) that he's looking to sell.  It comes
with the original box, manual, paperwork, etc., but--and here's the
cool part--the manual and serial number paper are in Japanese.  You can
download a .pdf copy of the MZ-5n manual from pentax.com, but I can burn a
copy onto CD if that's easier.

He wants $400 CAN ($300 US) for the body, which isn't a steal but isn't a
bad price either, at least locally.  The MZ-3 is the improved version of
the MZ-5n, and offers a faster maximum shutter speed, faster flash sync,
etc.  The MZ-3 was never available for sale in the U.S., though it was in
Canada.  I don't normally mention our used Pentax gear on the PDML, but
he's a good guy so I made an exception.

Because this is through the store (not me personally), we can take credit
cards as payment.  Taxes will depend on where it's being shipped to.
Email me off-list if you're interested or have any questions.

chris


On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Keith Whaley wrote:

> Hi Joe...
>
> What's an MZ-3? Must be a European designation?
> Discontinued now?
>
> Never mind. I always do this. Visit Google.com, and find out all I need
> to know...
> The MZ-3 is not available in the U.S. - it is essentially ["all the
> features of"] the MZ-5n, but with shutter speeds of 1/4000 and a flash
> synch of 1/125 sec.
>
> keith whaley
>
> Joe Wilensky wrote:
> >
> > I think the question was about the *ist film camera. I haven't played
> > with one, but I did recently pick up an MZ-5n (ZX-5n). The advantages
> > to the MZ/ZX-5n would be its compatability with all K-mount (and
> > screwmount) lenses and its classical interface, much like an
> > autofocus combo between the MX and Super Program.
> >
> >  From what I've seen, the ZX-5n fetches quite a bit on the used
> > market, as it is recognized as being the top-of-the-line ZX series
> > camera with its spotmetering, bracketing, TTL flash, etc. I know the
> > MZ-3 is even higher spec'd (and its prices reflect that), but it is
> > rarely found in North America, it seems.
> >
> [. . .]
>