Re: Re: ZX-L (Was: Upgrading to auto focus
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So if you were chosing between the ZX-L and the ZX-5N, which would you pick and why? It is really difficult for any other person to make the decision for you. It very much depends on your requirement and shooting style. Are there any must have features for you? Try going to a store and try out the cameras; they have very different interface. I personally would choose ZX-L + AF360FGZ, as controlled daylight balanced fill flash is important for me; and I prefer the interface. Don't forget that the lens is more important. I don't think there is a right or wrong decision; simply get the one you are more comfortable with. -- --Lawrence Kwan--SMS Info Service/Ringtone Convertor--PGP:finger/www-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vex.net/~lawrence/ -Key ID:0x6D23F3C4-- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: ZX-L (Was: Upgrading to auto focus
On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Andrew Robinson wrote: This is probably an odd question. Is the spot metering usable? It depends on how you use it. As it is tied to AE-Lock, it would not work in manual mode; it only works in aperture priority, shutter priority and program modes. And you cannot do spot metering continuously. You have to select the area, and press the button; and if you select a new area, you have to press the button twice to get a new reading. A slightly braoder question: is there anything the ZX-5N can do that the ZX-L cannot, at least in some fashion? ZX-5n can do center weighted metering for any lens (only older lens for ZX-L). ZX-5n can do continuous spot metering without pressing any buttons. ZX-5n also has panorama frame (I, for one, won't miss this feature). Some have complained the ZX-L's use of pentamirror instead of ZX-5n's pentaprism. I have been using MZ-7 (which has the same pentamirror viewfinder as ZX-L) side by side with my Super A and ME Super (both pentaprisms), and personally, I don't find it a problem at all. -- --Lawrence Kwan--SMS Info Service/Ringtone Convertor--PGP:finger/www-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vex.net/~lawrence/ -Key ID:0x6D23F3C4-- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: ZX-L (Was: Upgrading to auto focus
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, Lawrence Kwan wrote: Some have complained the ZX-L's use of pentamirror instead of ZX-5n's pentaprism. I have been using MZ-7 (which has the same pentamirror viewfinder as ZX-L) side by side with my Super A and ME Super (both pentaprisms), and personally, I don't find it a problem at all. I don't have MZ-7/L but I have MZ-M which hase penta mirror arrangement. I also possess Ricoh XR-8 Super which has a pentaprism viewfinder. The viewfinder magnification of Ricoh is higher than MZ-M/7/L. The viewfinder of Ricoh looks bigger and brighter than MZ-M/7/L and I find it easier to focus on the subject when the image looks big and bright. It will depend from person to person but I am begining to like my Ricoh more than MZ-M. Cheers, Ayash. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
ZX-L (Was: Upgrading to auto focus
Edward and Peter, Thank you for pointing out the spot metering on the ZX-L. I went back through all the literature I had downloaded and found no mention of it. This morning I downloaded the owner's manual and finally found it listed in the appendix on Pentax Program functions. This is probably an odd question. Is the spot metering usable? I've never had spot metering on one of my cameras before, so I'll believe whatever you tell me ;). There have been situations where I thought having spot metering would have helped me. I found a site on the internet which described a Zone Five system using a camera spot meter. Basically, meter the specific object of interest, decide whether the object should be white, light gray, medium gray, dark gray or black, set the exposure compensation accordingly, then compose and snap the shot. Is this kind of usage possible with the ZX-L's spot metering? A slightly braoder question: is there anything the ZX-5N can do that the ZX-L cannot, at least in some fashion? I think I have talked myself back into buying the ZX-L. Thanks! Andrew PDML wrote: Hello Andrew, Friday, July 26, 2002, 9:21:09 PM, you wrote: acn The ZX-L does lack some of the features of the ZX-5N that acn serious photographers like. Spot metering is one of them. ZX-L HAS spot metering, it just hidden in user functions and coupled with exposure lock. Center veighted metering there is also, but not selectable - switches to it automatically, when M or K lens mounted. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: RE: Upgrading to auto focus
On Fri, 26 Jul 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The ZX-L does lack some of the features of the ZX-5N that serious photographers like. Spot metering is one of them If it had spot metering, I would go for it in a heart beat. Actually, ZX-L does have spot metering. The only limitation is that you have to use it with AE-Lock. Don't forget that ZX-L/MZ-6 also has some extra features that ZX-5n lacks and serious photographers may like: such as higher shutter speed and higher flash sync speed, more customizable auto-bracketing settings, ability to have release-priority autofocus (servo), full info display on external LCD, ability to select half-stops shutter speed up to 30s, leaving film leader out on rewind, advanced flash and IR remote. The more advanced flash metering is one thing that would make me consider the ZX-L. I am also attracted to this feature. The High speed sync, P-TTL and automatic flash exposure compensation should make it easy to do balanced daylight fill flash. -- --Lawrence Kwan--SMS Info Service/Ringtone Convertor--PGP:finger/www-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vex.net/~lawrence/ -Key ID:0x6D23F3C4-- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Upgrading to auto focus
Thanks Fred! Bernd from Germany (PDML memeber) had a brochure on the 200/3.5AF and it said it focused as fast as the eye. Now, why didn`t Pentax make the 35-70/2.8AF in ManF? That would have been a gem, considering its speed. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - Original Message - From: Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 10:57 AM Subject: Re: Upgrading to auto focus Hi, Steve. You digress nicely ;) Thanks. It's the result of years of practice... g Out of curiosity, How did the VS1 200/3.5 AF lens perform? Quite well, in my opinion. (Remember, though, that this is being judged by a manual focus sort of guy - g.) Compared to the Ricoh 50/2, the VS1 200/3.5 seemed quite snappy at focusing, and generally right on both for accuracy and for precision. (The Ricoh seemed to be a little less likely to get the focus exactly right - whether this is the result of a design difference, a focal length difference, a sample difference, or what, I really don't know.) The VS1 looks a lot better than the Ricoh, too - g. One interesting feature that I tried with the VS1 autofocus lens is attaching a TC to it - the loss of aperture speed doesn't seem to affect the autofocusing ability, since it's all in the lens - g. I've been having some fun playing with the focus confirmation function on the MEF, and the autofocusing functioning of the VS!, the Ricoh, and the Pentax SMC-AF 35-70/2.8 (which, by the way, and despite some bad press given it here on the PDML, is actually a pretty sharp little zoom lens - but I digress...). g Fred - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Re: Upgrading to auto focus
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Heiko Hamann) I'm owning a 28-70 f4 and the 28-105 f4-5,6 (which is a Pentax, but originally built by Tamron afaik). I made some test pictures, but there doens`t seem to be any notable difference between both. The 28-105 has some advantages: its focal range includes the portrait length, it has a better mechanical quality, the hood is included and it is inner focused (i.e. you can use a polarizer). There is also an older 28-105 (powerzoom) and a newer 28-105 available, which I don't know. Heiko, can you find out which 28-105 lens you own? Does anyone else have any experience or opinions on these? I like the range. It would mean swapping lenses much less frequently. Thanks! Andrew - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Upgrading to auto focus
With the PZ-1p, you can turn off auto-rewind with a PF setting (set PF 12 to 1). Len --- -Original Message- From: Fred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 11:36 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Upgrading to auto focus Given that I have a pretty nice suite of lenses for my Super Program and most of the Pentax auto focus cameras are backwardly compatible, staying with Pentax seemed natural. I also have toyed with the idea of picking up an autofocus body to experiment with (gasp! - say it ain't so, Fred), being a primarily manual focus guy so far (all of my bodies are manual focus except for a couple of collector MEF's) (and my experiments with some of the primitive autofocus-within-the-lens-itself lenses such as the VS1 200/3.5 and the Ricoh 50/2 don't really count). I have to admit that my autofocus interest has been piqued a bit by the ZX-5n's that my wife and my daughter-in-law now use - the ZX-5n seems like a reasonably good body, sort of like a Super Program with autofocus. Well, sort of. However, I do have some strong concerns about certain, um, er, features that might possibly be forced on me by some of the autofocus bodies. To me, one of the most disquieting (no pun intended) characteristics of some autofocus bodies would be the automatic rewind at the end of a roll. So, my number 1 question is: #1. Which specific past and present autofocus Pentax bodies allow the ~user~ to determine when the spent roll of film is rewound back into the cassette? (I'd most like to arrive at a list of bodies to choose from, starting with the SF1/SFX - actually, I think the SF1 does look like a pretty interesting body.) To me, using in a required-to-be-quiet environment a camera programmed to automatically rewind noisily at the end of the roll is pretty similar to using a PS with built-in flash that can't be turned off (or that the user doesn't know how to turn off) in a visually quiet environment. But I digress... Fred - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Vs: RE: Upgrading to auto focus
The prisms - not porro - of lesser MZ models are made of mirrors, normal prism is solid glass. Porro is a different type of construction e.g. of mirrors or 2 more prisms. The only commercially successful SLRs that used porroprism finders were Olympus F series half-frame cameras. Also the accessory prism finder for Mamiyaflex 6x6 TLRs was of porroprism type. And, before somebody points it out, the very first SLR with a prism finder the Hungarian Gamma Duflex of 1949 had this type of finder. The eyepiece of the porro finder is not directly above the lens axis which gives lower profile. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Päivä: 26. heinäkuuta 2002 20:25 Aihe: Re: RE: Upgrading to auto focus From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] You might want the consider that the ZX-5n uses a pentaprism in it's viewfinder as opposed to the poro prism in the other ZX series cameras. What's the difference between a pentaprism and a poro prism? Andrew - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Upgrading to auto focus
Hi Steve, Steve Larson wrote: Thanks Fred! Bernd from Germany (PDML memeber) had a brochure on the 200/3.5AF and it said it focused as fast as the eye. Now, why didn`t Pentax make the 35-70/2.8AF in ManF? That would have been a gem, considering its speed. Well, they sort of did. Have you forgotten the M35-70/2.8-3.5 ? Cheers, Boz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
