Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
In bright sunlight the high shutter speeds can be wonderful assets. I have speeds up to 1/8000 in pentax and even a 1/12000 in a minolta body. If you want to blur your background in a portrait type image in bright sunlight you'll need the fast speeds to run f2 range aperatures. Very fast shutter speeds can be used for such purposes, but they're far from the only way. Slower films (at ISO 100, correct exposure at f/2 is 1/2000 in direct sun... even ZX-M can do that) and ND filters are two others that come to mind. On a shoot, I usually use 400-800 film, overall day. The fast shutter is definite plus here, when I want to use 2.8 or 3.5 aperture with 70-210 lens to blur background, or even faster with f/2 wideangle prime. That's why a Hexar RF appeals to me (although offtopic) - Leica and similar lenses are very nice near wide open, but you can't use them with any Leica... (whose 1/1000 is mostly 1/750 and 1/1000 only in the electronic M7). Especially in sunlight, shooting M6 at fastest 1/1000 even with 100 iso film would give you f/5.6, which is nowhere near wide open. And now imagine it with general use 400 film... But I digress. This all depends of course on what you shoot, your style, etc. Frantisek
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
I'd get the *ist. The big advantage of the new cameras are features like AF, and the *ist should have the best, probably even better than the MZ-S just becuase of tne march of technology. It's a lot cheaper too. Although I like the feel of my MZ-S, i don't think there's any problem with plastic bodies. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
On March 5, 2003 10:44 pm, Levente -Levi- Littvay wrote: Let's say I want to upgrade. I know that A lenses allow the camera to automatically set apeture and the FA lenses can autofocus. But nothing more (like what the dif is between AF and AF2, etc.) Why do you want to upgrade? What are you missing now? Find the camera that handles that. Nick
Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
On 5 Mar 2003, Levente -Levi- Littvay wrote: This brings up another Q I had for a long time but I never got around asking... Beyod the 1/4000 exposure versus the 1/2000, is there any difference between these two? I believe people also say teh MZ-3's mirror box is, supposedly, a flatter black. Is the MZ-3 not available in the US? (that SUCKS) No, it is not. I love my ZX-5n. I love everything about it, except I've been spoiled by bigger and better viewfinders. When I use the ZX-5n to manually focus, which is what I preferred, I _had_ to rely on the autofocus beep. I cannot manually focus with any degree of sharpness without that beep. So much so that I've bought an MX body to carry with me as a backup instead of my ZX-5n. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Taz wrote: I'm not familiar with the MX so I can't accurately compare, but the ZX-M has been compared as the modern K1000. It is a nice little camera, emphasis on little, but does not support autofocus or onboard flash if that is where you I was going to pick up an ZX-M once, to augment my ZX-5n... The incapability to manually focus made me move on. I don't think I would suggest this camera, although, truthfully, I've never used one.. about the ZX-5n, however the ratings seem excellent. I personally have 2 I believe the ZX-M is the same as the ZX-5, which was then superceded by the ZX-5n. For the most part its the same camera, I think there's some layout changes, plus autobracketing, spot meter, and (of course) AF on the -5n. complaints about the ZX series, they are TOO LIGHT and certajn models do not TOO light? You, evidently, have never worn one strapped around your neck for 12 hours straight.. :) Most people recommend the Battery Grip Fg for the ZX bodies. It does make it seem much bigger and easier to handle, however, it does also make it quite a bit heavier..and, obviously, YMMV. :) support the K(m) mount lenses(namely ZX-50 for one). I shake too much with them, but they are good cameras. The ZX-50, ZX-30, and ZX-60 all have crippled mounts. The -50 will fire the shutter of any non A series lens, but will not meter with it. The 30 and 60 won't even fire the shutter with a non A lens. In bright sunlight the high shutter speeds can be wonderful assets. I have speeds up to 1/8000 in pentax and even a 1/12000 in a minolta body. If you want to blur your background in a portrait type image in bright sunlight you'll need the fast speeds to run f2 range aperatures. Bah! Slower film! ;) Really, though, I've never experienced a problem with my ZX-5n's 1/2000 top speed, even though I routinely shoot wide open at f1.4. I do, however, stick primarily with ISO100 film. Figure if its really a problem, you can use an ND or even a polarizing filter... -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Boris Liberman wrote: your lenses are manual focus, it would be important. Also ZX-L (and probably *ist) don't have any focusing aids in the viewfinder, no split image, no micro prism, nothing. That's of course a sign of times - autofocus would do it for you, sorta. Remember, though, in the ZX-L you do have a focusing aid in the viewfinder, the very same one that works when the camera is actually autofocussing for you. It can be very, very useful. Also,s oemthing I should've said in an earlier post: People have changed the screens out of their ZX-5 and -5n cameras with the split screen from the ZX-M body. It will affect teh spot metering on these cameras, but it can in fact be done. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
In a message dated 3/6/2003 9:27:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I love my ZX-5n. I love everything about it, except I've been spoiled by bigger and better viewfinders. When I use the ZX-5n to manually focus, which is what I preferred, I _had_ to rely on the autofocus beep. I cannot manually focus with any degree of sharpness without that beep. So much so that I've bought an MX body to carry with me as a backup instead of my ZX-5n. Ditto. Except for the MX part. ;-) I am only familiar with the K-1000 and ZX-5n. I too am a little disappointed that the manual focus has to rely on the beep (or I do). There is not enough indication in the viewfinder to *really* tell when things are in focus manually. But that is about my only disappointment. I've been extremely impressed with how accurate the light meter is. I had to do a fair amount of compensation with the K-1000 (by hit and miss manually). The ZX-5n has an exposure compensation dial built-in. So far I haven't had to use it. (Though probably one of these days I should learn *how* to use it.) Doe aka Marnie ;-)
Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am only familiar with the K-1000 and ZX-5n. I too am a little disappointed that the manual focus has to rely on the beep (or I do). There is not enough indication in the viewfinder to *really* tell when things are in focus manually. I think everyone has to. Although, I notice that with 35mm my style has become poisoned by this technique.. Its tough to manually focus even the MX now, without the beep. Damn the 645, I'm forever spoiled on 35mm finders, I guess. But that is about my only disappointment. I've been extremely impressed with how accurate the light meter is. I had to do a fair amount of compensation with the K-1000 (by hit and miss manually). The ZX-5n has an exposure compensation dial built-in. So far I haven't had to use it. (Though probably one of these days I should learn *how* to use it.) I've also become pretty amazed at just how easy it is to do flash through a TTL camera, as well. To the point where I'm just a little surprised I was so apprehensive about it. This is a place where I really adore the -5n over the MX by far and away. I need to learn how to use the exposure comp dial to manipulate the flash output, but I've been too lazy to really care, lately. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
Hi, Not really disagreeing with what is said, but as a counterpoint, I have found that focussing my M*300/4 on the ZX-5n to be *much* easier than with either the ME or ME Super. I like the big bright viewfinders with my f/1.4 and f/2 lenses, but they are kind of dark and grainy by f/4, and that's where the 5n shines for me. And I hate that annoying beep. :-) William in Utah. - Original Message - From: gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 8:27 AM Subject: Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series) On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am only familiar with the K-1000 and ZX-5n. I too am a little disappointed that the manual focus has to rely on the beep (or I do). There is not enough indication in the viewfinder to *really* tell when things are in focus manually. I think everyone has to. Although, I notice that with 35mm my style has become poisoned by this technique.. Its tough to manually focus even the MX now, without the beep. Damn the 645, I'm forever spoiled on 35mm finders, I guess. But that is about my only disappointment. I've been extremely impressed with how accurate the light meter is. I had to do a fair amount of compensation with the K-1000 (by hit and miss manually). The ZX-5n has an exposure compensation dial built-in. So far I haven't had to use it. (Though probably one of these days I should learn *how* to use it.) I've also become pretty amazed at just how easy it is to do flash through a TTL camera, as well. To the point where I'm just a little surprised I was so apprehensive about it. This is a place where I really adore the -5n over the MX by far and away. I need to learn how to use the exposure comp dial to manipulate the flash output, but I've been too lazy to really care, lately. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
On Thursday, Mar 6, 2003, at 00:49 US/Pacific, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In bright sunlight the high shutter speeds can be wonderful assets. I have speeds up to 1/8000 in pentax and even a 1/12000 in a minolta body. If you want to blur your background in a portrait type image in bright sunlight you'll need the fast speeds to run f2 range aperatures. Very fast shutter speeds can be used for such purposes, but they're far from the only way. Slower films (at ISO 100, correct exposure at f/2 is 1/2000 in direct sun... even ZX-M can do that) and ND filters are two others that come to mind. -- David Barts Portland, OR
Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
Boris, I am suprised that you aren't happy with the ZX-L and AF220T. I use that combination for all my indoor flash shots, and I am very pleased with the results. First of all I need to acknowledge Bruce Dayton's help in improving my flash shots. He is a great resource for flash questions. FWIW, based on Bruce's help and my own experience, here's what I do for indoor people pictures with the AF220T: Put the camera in Manual mode. The aperture will determine the amount of flash illumination on the subject and the shutter speed will determine the amount of flash illumination of the background. With my FA 50mm, I usually use either a shutter speed from 1/30 to 1/60, depending on the ambient light and the amount of subject motion. Then I set the aperture depending on how much depth of field I want, how much flash I want on the subject. I normally use f/2 to f/5.6. With fluorescent lighting, you may want a faster shutter speed (like 1/60) and a smaller aperture (f/8 or so) to avoid color cast. Then I put on the AF220T, tilted at 45 degrees with a stofen omnibounce. The TTL flash metering takes care of the flash illumination. I am almost always happy with my flash exposure indoors. The light is soft and natural IMO. I think the AF220T is a sweet little flash :-) . Michael Boris Liberman wrote: Hi! g I've also become pretty amazed at just how easy it is to do flash through g a TTL camera, as well. To the point where I'm just a little surprised I g was so apprehensive about it. This is a place where I really adore the -5n g over the MX by far and away. I need to learn how to use the exposure comp g dial to manipulate the flash output, but I've been too lazy to really g care, lately. Either my camera is defective (which is unlikely) or defective is me g. However I have AF220T flash which supposedly should do wonders with ZX-L TTL metering. However my experience has been less than successful. It usually considerably overexposes. Which is logical if I shoot people or macro stuff where the subject is occupies small part of the frame. ZX-L can do flash exposure compensation (either by altering the ISO setting, or by some other even more esoteric means). But if one has to think of exposure compensation then one might as well learn old fashioned flash photography... I am quite unimpressed with ZX-L/AF220T combo... --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
RE: Fill flash (wasRe: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series))
-Original Message- From: gfen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Bruce Dayton wrote: I'll try to help here. Full flash pictures tend to look a bit harsh. Shadows can look unnatural and colors/shading are affected. So the basic idea is to add enough fill light to reduce problem areas but not so much as to overpower the main light source (daylight). Standard TTL flash with no compensation tends to start to look unnatural. By lowering the output, you can remove shadows in the eyes, remove So, is there a generic formula to be used in getting a feel for just how far you dial down teh flash in fill? The harsher the main (natural, available) light is, or the more directional, the more fill you need. Overcast : -2.5 (just enough for a little blip in the eyes) Full noon day sun : -.5 or -1 (need to fill in dtring shadows) Strong sunrise/sunset : varies according to the effect you want On a camera that lacks the convienent little dial to set this, how do you normally change this amount? Most SLR's have an exposure comp dial to do this. tv
Re: Fill flash (wasRe: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series))
There is no set formula. A rule of thumb would be to start 1 stop down for shadow fill and 2 stops down for catchlights. The more soft and diffused your main light source, the less fill you need. If you are using a camera that does not have exposure compensation, just don't use TTL mode on the flash. Set it to Auto mode and look at the f-stop on the camera and then set the auto f-stop on the flash to compensate. That is basically what I do with the 67 and leaf shutter lens. No ttl on that baby. Bruce Thursday, March 6, 2003, 11:19:14 AM, you wrote: g On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Bruce Dayton wrote: I'll try to help here. Full flash pictures tend to look a bit harsh. Shadows can look unnatural and colors/shading are affected. So the basic idea is to add enough fill light to reduce problem areas but not so much as to overpower the main light source (daylight). Standard TTL flash with no compensation tends to start to look unnatural. By lowering the output, you can remove shadows in the eyes, remove g So, is there a generic formula to be used in getting a feel for just how g far you dial down teh flash in fill? g On a camera that lacks the convienent little dial to set this, how do you g normally change this amount?
RE: Bounce flash, etc (was Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series))
-Original Message- From: gfen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Bruce Rubenstein wrote: Fill flash is used to compress the contrast of a scene (subject to background) so it fits into the dynamic range of the film. For people, usually -1 to -2 stops of fill to ambient looks natural and will put some nice catchlights in the eyes. Do you still get the catchlights as effectivly when using a bounce/diffuser, however? Yes, they just will have a different shape, and the shape won't be as sharply delimited. Bounce/diffusers: The smaller the size of a light source, the more directional and harder I do understand this part, I also know its the basis of why tilt is important on a flash, to bounce from the ceiling. I've pretty much taken every flash picture, to date, with the AF280T bounced from teh ceiling. its look is. This is why photographers use things like soft boxes. A softbox is basically a large, white box that you shoot your strobes into and they then reflect out, correct? More or less. They vary - some have more reflective surfaces, some have baffles, some just have a diffuse material between the light and the subject. Most on-camera softboxes just have the diffuser material. Bouncers/diffusers spread the light around so that it is not coming from a point source. The down side is that you are now lighting up a space, instead of a subject, so less light hits the subject and the you lose a couple of stops of light. The greater the distance between the flash and the subject the less effective the light modifier is in softening the look of the light. So, a bounce/diffuser is only effective at closer distances, and further away its preferable to just use the naked flash? Depends on the power of the flash. If you have a diffuser, you only need to use the bare flash if you think the diffuser is going to cut your power enough to underexpose. Will a bounce/diffuser assist in removing the unsightly shadows from behind people, as well, or is that really only do-able when bouncing off ceilings? If the flash is aligned with the lens, you shouldn't see too many shadows. If you see shadows, that's due to the angle of the flash wrt the subject. A diffuser will soften the edge of the shadow. The bigger the light source, the more indistinct the shadow. Bouncers work well, but: either have to be somewhat big and clumsy to do much good, or take advantage of the room's surfaces (you're SOL it they are too far away or a funny color). I use a Stofen Omnibounce. It is much smaller than a bouncer, doesn't have to be close to a room's surfaces, but will be effected by them. I looked up the Omnibounce on BH, and then checked the offical name of the items I was looking at: The pocket softbox http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bh5.sph/FrameWork.class?FNC=Prod uctActivator__Aproductlist_html___93262___LUSBM___REG___CatID=0___SID= F3FED674290 This will soften things up a little bit. The pocket bouncer http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bh5.sph/FrameWork.class?FNC=ProductActivat or__Aproductlist_html___32576___LUPB___REG___CatID=0___SID=F3FED674290 This thing is ok, but sucks on a bracket. - Another reason I'm looking into this is so I can have slightly better flash usage when I'm stacking lenses and doing macro that way. I know, I know, the best way is to do off-camera flash (or a ringflash, but that's not affordable now), however, I'm on a budget and the various off camera attachments are alot more than $25. :) Its because of concept of trying to extend teh flash and better angle its light towards a close macro subject I figured a bouncer would be teh way to go. I now wonder, however, if perhaps these two goals aren't going to be acceptably reached via the same equipment, and perhaps I should be just pursuing them seperatly. - For some reason my emailer isn't quoting that last section correctly. Anyway, you might want to just get a reflector and counce your light of that. Anything that is flat and white will work. - If you're going to do a wedding with a single, shoe mount flash I would suggest a bouncer/diffuser (go to direct flash if you're more than 15 From the various items above, and having an idea (I presume) of what I'm looking to accomplish overall, which would be the preferred way? Ominbounce? Pocket softbox? Pocket bouncer? Save my money and make do with tilting the flash? -- I would just point the flash up and use a big white reflector of some sort if you're trying to do cheap macro. tv
RE: Fill flash (wasRe: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series))
-Original Message- From: gfen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, tom wrote: Most SLR's have an exposure comp dial to do this. The 645's exposure compsensation will also affect TTL flash as well, then? Yes. You just need to set the aperture and shutter speed manually. The comp dial will only affect the flash. Good. I thought this was a special feature on Pentax's newer cameras. (have I mentioned lately I'm a complete and total flash newbie?) Here's an easy mistake to avoid: if you can't get a proper exposure with ambient light, you can't do fill flash. Underexposed ambient + underexposed flash = underexposed neg. tv
RE: Bounce flash, etc (was Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series))
-Original Message- From: gfen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, tom wrote: the subject. Most on-camera softboxes just have the diffuser material. Noted. I actually didn't think there were oncamera softboxes until I first saw the little Lumiquest job in a shop. There are bigger ones. Photoflex and someone else make them in 12x18 sizes (or thereabouts). If the flash is aligned with the lens, you shouldn't see too many shadows. If you see shadows, that's due to the angle of the flash wrt the subject. A diffuser will soften the edge of the shadow. The bigger the light source, the more indistinct the shadow. One of the things I noticed in some of my flash pictures of my brother's family were some pretty distinct shadows behind them. I'm unsure, now, if it was direct or bounced off the ceiling. If the flash is in the hotshoe, and you turn the camera vertically, you'll get shadows. Ceiling bounce doesn't give much in the way of shadows behind the subject. The pocket softbox This will soften things up a little bit. The pocket bouncer This thing is ok, but sucks on a bracket. I currently have no bracket...however, I presume that if I did the pocket softbox is a wiser choice to make? I personally prefer the Sto-fen Omni-Bounce, but yes, I like the softbox better then the bouncer. tv
RE: Bounce flash, etc (was Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series))
-Original Message- From: gfen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I personally prefer the Sto-fen Omni-Bounce, but yes, I like the softbox better then the bouncer. I think I'm leaning towards the Lumiquest ones just because I think I prefer the way they appear to nicely fold up rather than the begging to be broken box appearance of the Omni-Bounce... Um, they're basically unbreakable. tv
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
Levente, The *ist appears to be a very robust camera for its price and is supposed to have Pentax's latest and best autofocus. If autofocus is important to you, I would wait for that camera. As far as those portrait and landscape modes, the *ist has them, but you can just ignore them. The don't really get in the way. The one advanced feature that is very useful IMO is the high-speed flash sync. I use it all the time for outdoor portraits and snapshots. As far as I know, the only Pentax cameras that offer high-speed flash sync are the MZ-S, ZX-L and *ist. You have to buy the AF360-FGZ to get high-speed sync. Michael Levente -Levi- Littvay wrote: Let me preface that I don't speak the language of advanced photography. My main camera happily works without batteries, and even if I put batteries in them all it has is a light meter... (Pentax MX) I love this, I can say I really learned photography with this guy and I am usually getting satisfacorty results. The features on my MX (and backup ME Super SE) and M series lenses is what I understand. Never have been exposed to more. (I am absolutely serious... though I looked up what a mirrir lockup means when I considered buying a KX, now that I think of it I also know what multi exposure is :)) Let's say I want to upgrade. I know that A lenses allow the camera to automatically set apeture and the FA lenses can autofocus. But nothing more (like what the dif is between AF and AF2, etc.) What camera should I get? Can someone compare the *ist to the models of choice from the MZ or ZX series. What are the features and differences between features or feel, what those features mean, how useful they are, etc. Let me just say that I try to be serious about my photography so I prefer a camera with features that make sence to photographers and not bozos. Even if I can't use them now, I would rather learn pro features then set the camera to the Portrait or Landscape feature and let it do its thing. I can see from http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/ that the ZX-6, 7, 10, 30 50 has these features. I don't understand what these do but this sounds extremely fishy. Are these useful? Does the *ist have these? On the other hand I don't know what the rest (Av, M, P, Tv, Hm, etc.) mean either. I know there used to be a link to explanations but when I was doing only manual work I never bothered to read them. Now I can't find them... I know that the answer could be the size of a novel but if you don't mind punding it out... also if everyone just puts in their 2c worth I can put it together... :)) Many Thanks from the rookie of modern photography. L
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
Bruce Dayton wrote: Levente, MX is the ZX-5n. You can turn AF off and meter manually with the ... There are no gimmicky modes to learn or worry about. It is available now. Excellent advise and there just happens to be two listed on eBay right now. :-) -- Later, Gary
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
What, exactly, is high speed flash sync? Sorry for the dumbness again :( --- Michael Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Levente, The *ist appears to be a very robust camera for its price and is supposed to have Pentax's latest and best autofocus. If autofocus is important to you, I would wait for that camera. As far as those portrait and landscape modes, the *ist has them, but you can just ignore them. The don't really get in the way. The one advanced feature that is very useful IMO is the high-speed flash sync. I use it all the time for outdoor portraits and snapshots. As far as I know, the only Pentax cameras that offer high-speed flash sync are the MZ-S, ZX-L and *ist. You have to buy the AF360-FGZ to get high-speed sync. Michael Levente -Levi- Littvay wrote: Let me preface that I don't speak the language of advanced photography. My main camera happily works without batteries, and even if I put batteries in them all it has is a light meter... (Pentax MX) I love this, I can say I really learned photography with this guy and I am usually getting satisfacorty results. The features on my MX (and backup ME Super SE) and M series lenses is what I understand. Never have been exposed to more. (I am absolutely serious... though I looked up what a mirrir lockup means when I considered buying a KX, now that I think of it I also know what multi exposure is :)) Let's say I want to upgrade. I know that A lenses allow the camera to automatically set apeture and the FA lenses can autofocus. But nothing more (like what the dif is between AF and AF2, etc.) What camera should I get? Can someone compare the *ist to the models of choice from the MZ or ZX series. What are the features and differences between features or feel, what those features mean, how useful they are, etc. Let me just say that I try to be serious about my photography so I prefer a camera with features that make sence to photographers and not bozos. Even if I can't use them now, I would rather learn pro features then set the camera to the Portrait or Landscape feature and let it do its thing. I can see from http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/ that the ZX-6, 7, 10, 30 50 has these features. I don't understand what these do but this sounds extremely fishy. Are these useful? Does the *ist have these? On the other hand I don't know what the rest (Av, M, P, Tv, Hm, etc.) mean either. I know there used to be a link to explanations but when I was doing only manual work I never bothered to read them. Now I can't find them... I know that the answer could be the size of a novel but if you don't mind punding it out... also if everyone just puts in their 2c worth I can put it together... :)) Many Thanks from the rookie of modern photography. L __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
Steve, When doing daylight fill flash you are normally limited to the flash synch speed for the shutter. Many times this requires you to choose a very small f-stop due to the brightness. HSS allows you to choose any shutter speed you want above the flash synch by strobing the flash so that the image is evenly illuminated. Naturally the range of the flash is severely shortened. Most useful for portraits in the daylight - killing shadows on the face, putting a catchlight in the eyes. Bruce Wednesday, March 5, 2003, 8:13:21 PM, you wrote: SP What, exactly, is high speed flash sync? SP Sorry for the dumbness again :( SP --- Michael Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Levente, The *ist appears to be a very robust camera for its price and is supposed to have Pentax's latest and best autofocus. If autofocus is important to you, I would wait for that camera. As far as those portrait and landscape modes, the *ist has them, but you can just ignore them. The don't really get in the way. The one advanced feature that is very useful IMO is the high-speed flash sync. I use it all the time for outdoor portraits and snapshots. As far as I know, the only Pentax cameras that offer high-speed flash sync are the MZ-S, ZX-L and *ist. You have to buy the AF360-FGZ to get high-speed sync. Michael Levente -Levi- Littvay wrote: Let me preface that I don't speak the language of advanced photography. My main camera happily works without batteries, and even if I put batteries in them all it has is a light meter... (Pentax MX) I love this, I can say I really learned photography with this guy and I am usually getting satisfacorty results. The features on my MX (and backup ME Super SE) and M series lenses is what I understand. Never have been exposed to more. (I am absolutely serious... though I looked up what a mirrir lockup means when I considered buying a KX, now that I think of it I also know what multi exposure is :)) Let's say I want to upgrade. I know that A lenses allow the camera to automatically set apeture and the FA lenses can autofocus. But nothing more (like what the dif is between AF and AF2, etc.) What camera should I get? Can someone compare the *ist to the models of choice from the MZ or ZX series. What are the features and differences between features or feel, what those features mean, how useful they are, etc. Let me just say that I try to be serious about my photography so I prefer a camera with features that make sence to photographers and not bozos. Even if I can't use them now, I would rather learn pro features then set the camera to the Portrait or Landscape feature and let it do its thing. I can see from http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/ that the ZX-6, 7, 10, 30 50 has these features. I don't understand what these do but this sounds extremely fishy. Are these useful? Does the *ist have these? On the other hand I don't know what the rest (Av, M, P, Tv, Hm, etc.) mean either. I know there used to be a link to explanations but when I was doing only manual work I never bothered to read them. Now I can't find them... I know that the answer could be the size of a novel but if you don't mind punding it out... also if everyone just puts in their 2c worth I can put it together... :)) Many Thanks from the rookie of modern photography. L SP __ SP Do you Yahoo!? SP Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more SP http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
OK, So in order to get accurate exposure, is this a setting that has to be on the camera body, or on the flash unit itself, or both? Is this something I could achieve with my Super Program or MX, if I picked up a newer flash? Sorry again to bother you guys for the mundane... --- Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steve, When doing daylight fill flash you are normally limited to the flash synch speed for the shutter. Many times this requires you to choose a very small f-stop due to the brightness. HSS allows you to choose any shutter speed you want above the flash synch by strobing the flash so that the image is evenly illuminated. Naturally the range of the flash is severely shortened. Most useful for portraits in the daylight - killing shadows on the face, putting a catchlight in the eyes. Bruce Wednesday, March 5, 2003, 8:13:21 PM, you wrote: SP What, exactly, is high speed flash sync? SP Sorry for the dumbness again :( SP --- Michael Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Levente, The *ist appears to be a very robust camera for its price and is supposed to have Pentax's latest and best autofocus. If autofocus is important to you, I would wait for that camera. As far as those portrait and landscape modes, the *ist has them, but you can just ignore them. The don't really get in the way. The one advanced feature that is very useful IMO is the high-speed flash sync. I use it all the time for outdoor portraits and snapshots. As far as I know, the only Pentax cameras that offer high-speed flash sync are the MZ-S, ZX-L and *ist. You have to buy the AF360-FGZ to get high-speed sync. Michael Levente -Levi- Littvay wrote: Let me preface that I don't speak the language of advanced photography. My main camera happily works without batteries, and even if I put batteries in them all it has is a light meter... (Pentax MX) I love this, I can say I really learned photography with this guy and I am usually getting satisfacorty results. The features on my MX (and backup ME Super SE) and M series lenses is what I understand. Never have been exposed to more. (I am absolutely serious... though I looked up what a mirrir lockup means when I considered buying a KX, now that I think of it I also know what multi exposure is :)) Let's say I want to upgrade. I know that A lenses allow the camera to automatically set apeture and the FA lenses can autofocus. But nothing more (like what the dif is between AF and AF2, etc.) What camera should I get? Can someone compare the *ist to the models of choice from the MZ or ZX series. What are the features and differences between features or feel, what those features mean, how useful they are, etc. Let me just say that I try to be serious about my photography so I prefer a camera with features that make sence to photographers and not bozos. Even if I can't use them now, I would rather learn pro features then set the camera to the Portrait or Landscape feature and let it do its thing. I can see from http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/ that the ZX-6, 7, 10, 30 50 has these features. I don't understand what these do but this sounds extremely fishy. Are these useful? Does the *ist have these? On the other hand I don't know what the rest (Av, M, P, Tv, Hm, etc.) mean either. I know there used to be a link to explanations but when I was doing only manual work I never bothered to read them. Now I can't find them... I know that the answer could be the size of a novel but if you don't mind punding it out... also if everyone just puts in their 2c worth I can put it together... :)) Many Thanks from the rookie of modern photography. L SP __ SP Do you Yahoo!? SP Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more SP http://taxes.yahoo.com/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/
High Speed Flash (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.)
What, exactly, is high speed flash sync? Sorry for the dumbness again :( I know what it is... (I think) The feature that lets you use faster exposure then my good old 1/60... BUT? What is it good for? :)) PS: Sorry, I never used a flash... yet :)) The f1.4 50mm and my rock steady hand usually does a good enough job :)) L PS: Not to kill the old thread... :)) Keep 'em commin.
MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
My hunch is that the camera that handles most like the MX is the ZX-5n. This brings up another Q I had for a long time but I never got around asking... Beyod the 1/4000 exposure versus the 1/2000, is there any difference between these two? Is the MZ-3 not available in the US? (that SUCKS) L PS: Again... the intention was not to kill the old thread... :)) Keep 'em commin' :))
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
Steve, No. You have to have both a body and flash that work together. The cameras that Michael mentioned are your only options and the AF360FGZ is the only Pentax flash to date to do this. Bruce Wednesday, March 5, 2003, 8:36:38 PM, you wrote: SP OK, SP So in order to get accurate exposure, is this a SP setting that has to be on the camera body, or on the SP flash unit itself, or both? Is this something I could SP achieve with my Super Program or MX, if I picked up a SP newer flash? SP Sorry again to bother you guys for the mundane... SP --- Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steve, When doing daylight fill flash you are normally limited to the flash synch speed for the shutter. Many times this requires you to choose a very small f-stop due to the brightness. HSS allows you to choose any shutter speed you want above the flash synch by strobing the flash so that the image is evenly illuminated. Naturally the range of the flash is severely shortened. Most useful for portraits in the daylight - killing shadows on the face, putting a catchlight in the eyes. Bruce Wednesday, March 5, 2003, 8:13:21 PM, you wrote: SP What, exactly, is high speed flash sync? SP Sorry for the dumbness again :( SP --- Michael Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Levente, The *ist appears to be a very robust camera for its price and is supposed to have Pentax's latest and best autofocus. If autofocus is important to you, I would wait for that camera. As far as those portrait and landscape modes, the *ist has them, but you can just ignore them. The don't really get in the way. The one advanced feature that is very useful IMO is the high-speed flash sync. I use it all the time for outdoor portraits and snapshots. As far as I know, the only Pentax cameras that offer high-speed flash sync are the MZ-S, ZX-L and *ist. You have to buy the AF360-FGZ to get high-speed sync. Michael Levente -Levi- Littvay wrote: Let me preface that I don't speak the language of advanced photography. My main camera happily works without batteries, and even if I put batteries in them all it has is a light meter... (Pentax MX) I love this, I can say I really learned photography with this guy and I am usually getting satisfacorty results. The features on my MX (and backup ME Super SE) and M series lenses is what I understand. Never have been exposed to more. (I am absolutely serious... though I looked up what a mirrir lockup means when I considered buying a KX, now that I think of it I also know what multi exposure is :)) Let's say I want to upgrade. I know that A lenses allow the camera to automatically set apeture and the FA lenses can autofocus. But nothing more (like what the dif is between AF and AF2, etc.) What camera should I get? Can someone compare the *ist to the models of choice from the MZ or ZX series. What are the features and differences between features or feel, what those features mean, how useful they are, etc. Let me just say that I try to be serious about my photography so I prefer a camera with features that make sence to photographers and not bozos. Even if I can't use them now, I would rather learn pro features then set the camera to the Portrait or Landscape feature and let it do its thing. I can see from http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/ that the ZX-6, 7, 10, 30 50 has these features. I don't understand what these do but this sounds extremely fishy. Are these useful? Does the *ist have these? On the other hand I don't know what the rest (Av, M, P, Tv, Hm, etc.) mean either. I know there used to be a link to explanations but when I was doing only manual work I never bothered to read them. Now I can't find them... I know that the answer could be the size of a novel but if you don't mind punding it out... also if everyone just puts in their 2c worth I can put it together... :)) Many Thanks from the rookie of modern photography. L SP __ SP Do you Yahoo!? SP Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more SP http://taxes.yahoo.com/ SP __ SP Do you Yahoo!? SP Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more SP http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Steve Pearson wrote: So in order to get accurate exposure, is this a setting that has to be on the camera body, or on the flash unit itself, or both? Both. Both the camera and the flash must have specially designed hardware to enable this feature. Is this something I could achieve with my Super Program or MX, if I picked up a newer flash? No, it is not possible. So far, only MZ-S, ZX-L(MZ-L/6) and the new *ist support the advanced flash feature with AF360FGZ. This includes High speed sync as mentioned, wireless flash and P-TTL (using a flash pre-fire and the matrix metering to determine the optimal flash exposure). -- --Lawrence Kwan--SMS Info Service/Ringtone Convertor--PGP:finger/www-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vex.net/~lawrence/ -Key ID:0x6D23F3C4--
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
OK, Thanks. I plan on waiting for the *ist D. Did somebody say it will have HSS? Then, I will also have to add the 360 flash. Thanks again! --- Lawrence Kwan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Steve Pearson wrote: So in order to get accurate exposure, is this a setting that has to be on the camera body, or on the flash unit itself, or both? Both. Both the camera and the flash must have specially designed hardware to enable this feature. Is this something I could achieve with my Super Program or MX, if I picked up a newer flash? No, it is not possible. So far, only MZ-S, ZX-L(MZ-L/6) and the new *ist support the advanced flash feature with AF360FGZ. This includes High speed sync as mentioned, wireless flash and P-TTL (using a flash pre-fire and the matrix metering to determine the optimal flash exposure). -- --Lawrence Kwan--SMS Info Service/Ringtone Convertor--PGP:finger/www-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vex.net/~lawrence/ -Key ID:0x6D23F3C4-- __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: High Speed Flash (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.)
High speed flash sync gives you further sharpness and clairity to your fill flash action photos, at least that's my understanding of it - Original Message - From: Levente -Levi- Littvay [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 10:44 PM Subject: High Speed Flash (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.) What, exactly, is high speed flash sync? Sorry for the dumbness again :( I know what it is... (I think) The feature that lets you use faster exposure then my good old 1/60... BUT? What is it good for? :)) PS: Sorry, I never used a flash... yet :)) The f1.4 50mm and my rock steady hand usually does a good enough job :)) L PS: Not to kill the old thread... :)) Keep 'em commin.
Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
This brings up another Q I had for a long time but I never got around asking... Beyod the 1/4000 exposure versus the 1/2000, is there any difference between these two? 1/100s vs 1/125s x-sync. Other than that, I think they are identical. regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
I'm not familiar with the MX so I can't accurately compare, but the ZX-M has been compared as the modern K1000. It is a nice little camera, emphasis on little, but does not support autofocus or onboard flash if that is where you want to go. It does have DOF preview though. Retail is very reasonable with new prices $149 or less. I think in one of your posts you wanted to learn on professional equipment though if I remember correctly. I would imagine that would be the MS-Z. There are some good values available in some very capable PZ-1 and PZ-1P camera available out there now as well on the used market. $300 to $400 for a pro/serious amatuer body. Can't say about the ZX-5n, however the ratings seem excellent. I personally have 2 complaints about the ZX series, they are TOO LIGHT and certajn models do not support the K(m) mount lenses(namely ZX-50 for one). I shake too much with them, but they are good cameras. In bright sunlight the high shutter speeds can be wonderful assets. I have speeds up to 1/8000 in pentax and even a 1/12000 in a minolta body. If you want to blur your background in a portrait type image in bright sunlight you'll need the fast speeds to run f2 range aperatures. My hunch is that the camera that handles most like the MX is the ZX-5n. This brings up another Q I had for a long time but I never got around asking... Beyod the 1/4000 exposure versus the 1/2000, is there any difference between these two? Is the MZ-3 not available in the US? (that SUCKS) L PS: Again... the intention was not to kill the old thread... :)) Keep 'em commin' :))
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
Steve, Yes, the *ist or *ist D have HSS. The 360 flash is probably the most versatile flash Pentax has produced. It can be use in manual or auto (with good f stop range) on everything from an MX all the way up to wireless HSS on an MZ-S with modeling light (strobe). It has three weaknesses - not as much power as the AF500FTZ, no swivel (not a big deal to me), and no capacity to take alternative power supply (Quantum battery pack). Bruce Wednesday, March 5, 2003, 9:24:26 PM, you wrote: SP OK, SP Thanks. I plan on waiting for the *ist D. Did SP somebody say it will have HSS? SP Then, I will also have to add the 360 flash. SP Thanks again! SP --- Lawrence Kwan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Steve Pearson wrote: So in order to get accurate exposure, is this a setting that has to be on the camera body, or on the flash unit itself, or both? Both. Both the camera and the flash must have specially designed hardware to enable this feature. Is this something I could achieve with my Super Program or MX, if I picked up a newer flash? No, it is not possible. So far, only MZ-S, ZX-L(MZ-L/6) and the new *ist support the advanced flash feature with AF360FGZ. This includes High speed sync as mentioned, wireless flash and P-TTL (using a flash pre-fire and the matrix metering to determine the optimal flash exposure). -- --Lawrence Kwan--SMS Info Service/Ringtone Convertor--PGP:finger/www-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vex.net/~lawrence/ -Key ID:0x6D23F3C4-- SP __ SP Do you Yahoo!? SP Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more SP http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
Levente, One thing to remember about the ZX-5n/3 bodies. Because they have a physical shutter speed dial, they can only represent a certain number of shutter speeds. So the MZ-3 loses one slow speed setting to gain the 1/4000 on the top end. Also, the faster shutter usually has a higher flash synch. My guess is the MZ-3 has a slightly faster shutter synch. You may be able to order one out of Canada if you really want one. Bruce Wednesday, March 5, 2003, 8:47:35 PM, you wrote: My hunch is that the camera that handles most like the MX is the ZX-5n. LLL This brings up another Q I had for a long time but I never got around LLL asking... Beyod the 1/4000 exposure versus the 1/2000, is there any LLL difference between these two? LLL Is the MZ-3 not available in the US? (that SUCKS) LLL L LLL PS: Again... the intention was not to kill the old thread... :)) Keep LLL 'em commin' :))
Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series)
It's been my experience on Pentaxs that the speeds on the dial are all that is available for shutter priority. However in aperature priority there is a larger range of shutter speeds available. - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Levente -Levi- Littvay [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 12:05 AM Subject: Re: MZ-3 vs ZX(or MZ)-5n (EX: Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series) Levente, One thing to remember about the ZX-5n/3 bodies. Because they have a physical shutter speed dial, they can only represent a certain number of shutter speeds. So the MZ-3 loses one slow speed setting to gain the 1/4000 on the top end. Also, the faster shutter usually has a higher flash synch. My guess is the MZ-3 has a slightly faster shutter synch. You may be able to order one out of Canada if you really want one. Bruce Wednesday, March 5, 2003, 8:47:35 PM, you wrote: My hunch is that the camera that handles most like the MX is the ZX-5n. LLL This brings up another Q I had for a long time but I never got around LLL asking... Beyod the 1/4000 exposure versus the 1/2000, is there any LLL difference between these two? LLL Is the MZ-3 not available in the US? (that SUCKS) LLL L LLL PS: Again... the intention was not to kill the old thread... :)) Keep LLL 'em commin' :))
Re: *ist v. MZ or ZX series.
Bruce Dayton a écrit: Steve, Yes, the *ist or *ist D have HSS. The 360 flash is probably the most versatile flash Pentax has produced. It can be use in manual or auto (with good f stop range) on everything from an MX all the way up to wireless HSS on an MZ-S with modeling light (strobe). ... Yes, the 360 work on all currents modes, according with the body features: manual auto TTL P-TTL The only bad feature: no scale for APS coverage, only 35mm/645/6x7 Michel
