Re: Re[2]: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question
It's a measure of reliability. Mean Time Between Failures. Len --- > Excuse me, but what is MTBF? > All the best! > Raimo > Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen - 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: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question
A professional quality camera like the LX should be able to at least double that - 100.000 exposures is a minimum. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 05. tammikuuta 2002 1:33 Aihe: Re: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question >I've had a failure of the motor on a PZ1 after several years of heavy usage >(maybe 1500 - 2000 rolls of 36 exp, no home rolled), and also on a PZ1P >after significantly less usage than the PZ1. The Pentax repair tech in >Colorado said it was unusual, but not unexpected given the amount of usage. > >Ken Waller >- Original Message - >From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 12:16 PM >Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question > > >> Raimo, >> >> Don't know for sure, but based on reports on the list here for the >> past several years, I would say that the PZ-1p is more reliable on >> motors. There have been multiple reports of ZX-5's failing on film >> transport and I have yet to hear of any PZ-1p's. My guess is that the >> ZX series motors are cheaper and lighter - has nothing to do with >> better reliability, only worse. >> >> >> Bruce Dayton >> >> >> >> Friday, January 04, 2002, 9:08:00 AM, you wrote: >> >> RK> Maybe the PZ-1p has more torquey motor(s) - it has more FPS, too. But >does it really affect reliability - only time and prolonged use will tell. >Maybe the MZ series has less torque to improve >> RK> longevity, who knows? >> RK> Does the PZ-1p have one motor just for rewind? IIRC the Canon T-90 had >3 motors. Many cameras have only one. >> RK> All the best! >> RK> Raimo >> RK> Personal photography homepage at >http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen >> >> RK> -Alkuperäinen viesti- >> RK> Lähettäjä: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> RK> Vastaanottaja: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> RK> Päivä: 04. tammikuuta 2002 1:00 >> RK> Aihe: Re: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question >> >> >> >>Raimo, >> >> >> >>Yes, but have you been using bulk rolled film? It doesn't roll in and >> >>out of the cannister as smoothly as the manufacturers stuff. I have >> >>several ZX's and had 2 PZ-1p's. When winding and rewinding, the PZ-1p >> >>tends to pull without any change in motor speed (pitch). The ZX's >> >>however, tend to go up and down quite noticeably during rewind on bulk >> >>rolled film. Plastic cannisters are even worse than metal ones. So I >> >>am saying that the power-torque (not speed) of the PZ-1p is better >> >>than the ZX's. My current MZ-S's seem better than the ZX series, but >> >>not quite as strong as the PZ-1p. >> >> >> >>Hope this clears things up. >> >> >> >> >> >>Bruce Dayton - 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[2]: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question
Excuse me, but what is MTBF? All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 05. tammikuuta 2002 1:50 Aihe: Re[2]: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question >Kenneth, > >It certainly would be interesting to compare the MTBF of the motors of >the PZ-1p and the ZX-5n. After using them both, I gotta believe the >PZ-1p is higher. > > >Bruce Dayton > > > >Friday, January 04, 2002, 4:11:27 PM, you wrote: > >KW> I've had a failure of the motor on a PZ1 after several years of heavy usage >KW> (maybe 1500 - 2000 rolls of 36 exp, no home rolled), and also on a PZ1P >KW> after significantly less usage than the PZ1. The Pentax repair tech in >KW> Colorado said it was unusual, but not unexpected given the amount of usage. > >KW> Ken Waller >KW> - Original Message - >KW> From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >KW> To: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >KW> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 12:16 PM >KW> Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question > > >>> Raimo, >>> >>> Don't know for sure, but based on reports on the list here for the >>> past several years, I would say that the PZ-1p is more reliable on >>> motors. There have been multiple reports of ZX-5's failing on film >>> transport and I have yet to hear of any PZ-1p's. My guess is that the >>> ZX series motors are cheaper and lighter - has nothing to do with >>> better reliability, only worse. >>> >>> >>> Bruce Dayton >>> >>> >>> >>> Friday, January 04, 2002, 9:08:00 AM, you wrote: >>> >>> RK> Maybe the PZ-1p has more torquey motor(s) - it has more FPS, too. But >KW> does it really affect reliability - only time and prolonged use will tell. >KW> Maybe the MZ series has less torque to improve >>> RK> longevity, who knows? >>> RK> Does the PZ-1p have one motor just for rewind? IIRC the Canon T-90 had >KW> 3 motors. Many cameras have only one. >>> RK> All the best! >>> RK> Raimo >>> RK> Personal photography homepage at >KW> http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen >>> >>> RK> -Alkuperäinen viesti- >>> RK> Lähettäjä: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> RK> Vastaanottaja: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> RK> Päivä: 04. tammikuuta 2002 1:00 >>> RK> Aihe: Re: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question >>> >>> >>> >>Raimo, >>> >> >>> >>Yes, but have you been using bulk rolled film? It doesn't roll in and >>> >>out of the cannister as smoothly as the manufacturers stuff. I have >>> >>several ZX's and had 2 PZ-1p's. When winding and rewinding, the PZ-1p >>> >>tends to pull without any change in motor speed (pitch). The ZX's >>> >>however, tend to go up and down quite noticeably during rewind on bulk >>> >>rolled film. Plastic cannisters are even worse than metal ones. So I >>> >>am saying that the power-torque (not speed) of the PZ-1p is better >>> >>than the ZX's. My current MZ-S's seem better than the ZX series, but >>> >>not quite as strong as the PZ-1p. >>> >> >>> >>Hope this clears things up. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>Bruce Dayton >>> - - 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[2]: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question
Kenneth, It certainly would be interesting to compare the MTBF of the motors of the PZ-1p and the ZX-5n. After using them both, I gotta believe the PZ-1p is higher. Bruce Dayton Friday, January 04, 2002, 4:11:27 PM, you wrote: KW> I've had a failure of the motor on a PZ1 after several years of heavy usage KW> (maybe 1500 - 2000 rolls of 36 exp, no home rolled), and also on a PZ1P KW> after significantly less usage than the PZ1. The Pentax repair tech in KW> Colorado said it was unusual, but not unexpected given the amount of usage. KW> Ken Waller KW> - Original Message - KW> From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KW> To: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KW> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 12:16 PM KW> Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question >> Raimo, >> >> Don't know for sure, but based on reports on the list here for the >> past several years, I would say that the PZ-1p is more reliable on >> motors. There have been multiple reports of ZX-5's failing on film >> transport and I have yet to hear of any PZ-1p's. My guess is that the >> ZX series motors are cheaper and lighter - has nothing to do with >> better reliability, only worse. >> >> >> Bruce Dayton >> >> >> >> Friday, January 04, 2002, 9:08:00 AM, you wrote: >> >> RK> Maybe the PZ-1p has more torquey motor(s) - it has more FPS, too. But KW> does it really affect reliability - only time and prolonged use will tell. KW> Maybe the MZ series has less torque to improve >> RK> longevity, who knows? >> RK> Does the PZ-1p have one motor just for rewind? IIRC the Canon T-90 had KW> 3 motors. Many cameras have only one. >> RK> All the best! >> RK> Raimo >> RK> Personal photography homepage at KW> http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen >> >> RK> -Alkuperäinen viesti- >> RK> Lähettäjä: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> RK> Vastaanottaja: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> RK> Päivä: 04. tammikuuta 2002 1:00 >> RK> Aihe: Re: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question >> >> >> >>Raimo, >> >> >> >>Yes, but have you been using bulk rolled film? It doesn't roll in and >> >>out of the cannister as smoothly as the manufacturers stuff. I have >> >>several ZX's and had 2 PZ-1p's. When winding and rewinding, the PZ-1p >> >>tends to pull without any change in motor speed (pitch). The ZX's >> >>however, tend to go up and down quite noticeably during rewind on bulk >> >>rolled film. Plastic cannisters are even worse than metal ones. So I >> >>am saying that the power-torque (not speed) of the PZ-1p is better >> >>than the ZX's. My current MZ-S's seem better than the ZX series, but >> >>not quite as strong as the PZ-1p. >> >> >> >>Hope this clears things up. >> >> >> >> >> >>Bruce Dayton >> - >> 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 . KW> - KW> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, KW> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to KW> 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: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question
I've had a failure of the motor on a PZ1 after several years of heavy usage (maybe 1500 - 2000 rolls of 36 exp, no home rolled), and also on a PZ1P after significantly less usage than the PZ1. The Pentax repair tech in Colorado said it was unusual, but not unexpected given the amount of usage. Ken Waller - Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 12:16 PM Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question > Raimo, > > Don't know for sure, but based on reports on the list here for the > past several years, I would say that the PZ-1p is more reliable on > motors. There have been multiple reports of ZX-5's failing on film > transport and I have yet to hear of any PZ-1p's. My guess is that the > ZX series motors are cheaper and lighter - has nothing to do with > better reliability, only worse. > > > Bruce Dayton > > > > Friday, January 04, 2002, 9:08:00 AM, you wrote: > > RK> Maybe the PZ-1p has more torquey motor(s) - it has more FPS, too. But does it really affect reliability - only time and prolonged use will tell. Maybe the MZ series has less torque to improve > RK> longevity, who knows? > RK> Does the PZ-1p have one motor just for rewind? IIRC the Canon T-90 had 3 motors. Many cameras have only one. > RK> All the best! > RK> Raimo > RK> Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen > > RK> -Alkuperäinen viesti- > RK> Lähettäjä: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > RK> Vastaanottaja: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > RK> Päivä: 04. tammikuuta 2002 1:00 > RK> Aihe: Re: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question > > > >>Raimo, > >> > >>Yes, but have you been using bulk rolled film? It doesn't roll in and > >>out of the cannister as smoothly as the manufacturers stuff. I have > >>several ZX's and had 2 PZ-1p's. When winding and rewinding, the PZ-1p > >>tends to pull without any change in motor speed (pitch). The ZX's > >>however, tend to go up and down quite noticeably during rewind on bulk > >>rolled film. Plastic cannisters are even worse than metal ones. So I > >>am saying that the power-torque (not speed) of the PZ-1p is better > >>than the ZX's. My current MZ-S's seem better than the ZX series, but > >>not quite as strong as the PZ-1p. > >> > >>Hope this clears things up. > >> > >> > >>Bruce Dayton > - > 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: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question
IIRC (and I may be wrong) it was the AF motors that failed - but there were only a couple of cases and it was some time ago - no new occurrences reported on the list. Looks like Pentax has got it right. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 04. tammikuuta 2002 18:37 Aihe: Re: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question >Raimo, > >Don't know for sure, but based on reports on the list here for the >past several years, I would say that the PZ-1p is more reliable on >motors. There have been multiple reports of ZX-5's failing on film >transport and I have yet to hear of any PZ-1p's. My guess is that the >ZX series motors are cheaper and lighter - has nothing to do with >better reliability, only worse. > > >Bruce Dayton > > > >Friday, January 04, 2002, 9:08:00 AM, you wrote: > >RK> Maybe the PZ-1p has more torquey motor(s) - it has more FPS, too. But does it >really affect reliability - only time and prolonged use will tell. Maybe the MZ >series has less torque to improve >RK> longevity, who knows? >RK> Does the PZ-1p have one motor just for rewind? IIRC the Canon T-90 had 3 motors. >Many cameras have only one. >RK> All the best! >RK> Raimo >RK> Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen > >RK> -Alkuperäinen viesti- >RK> Lähettäjä: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >RK> Vastaanottaja: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >RK> Päivä: 04. tammikuuta 2002 1:00 >RK> Aihe: Re: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question > > >>>Raimo, >>> >>>Yes, but have you been using bulk rolled film? It doesn't roll in and >>>out of the cannister as smoothly as the manufacturers stuff. I have >>>several ZX's and had 2 PZ-1p's. When winding and rewinding, the PZ-1p >>>tends to pull without any change in motor speed (pitch). The ZX's >>>however, tend to go up and down quite noticeably during rewind on bulk >>>rolled film. Plastic cannisters are even worse than metal ones. So I >>>am saying that the power-torque (not speed) of the PZ-1p is better >>>than the ZX's. My current MZ-S's seem better than the ZX series, but >>>not quite as strong as the PZ-1p. >>> >>>Hope this clears things up. >>> >>> >>>Bruce Dayton - 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: Vs: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question
Raimo, Don't know for sure, but based on reports on the list here for the past several years, I would say that the PZ-1p is more reliable on motors. There have been multiple reports of ZX-5's failing on film transport and I have yet to hear of any PZ-1p's. My guess is that the ZX series motors are cheaper and lighter - has nothing to do with better reliability, only worse. Bruce Dayton Friday, January 04, 2002, 9:08:00 AM, you wrote: RK> Maybe the PZ-1p has more torquey motor(s) - it has more FPS, too. But does it really affect reliability - only time and prolonged use will tell. Maybe the MZ series has less torque to improve RK> longevity, who knows? RK> Does the PZ-1p have one motor just for rewind? IIRC the Canon T-90 had 3 motors. Many cameras have only one. RK> All the best! RK> Raimo RK> Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen RK> -Alkuperäinen viesti- RK> Lähettäjä: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> RK> Vastaanottaja: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> RK> Päivä: 04. tammikuuta 2002 1:00 RK> Aihe: Re: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question >>Raimo, >> >>Yes, but have you been using bulk rolled film? It doesn't roll in and >>out of the cannister as smoothly as the manufacturers stuff. I have >>several ZX's and had 2 PZ-1p's. When winding and rewinding, the PZ-1p >>tends to pull without any change in motor speed (pitch). The ZX's >>however, tend to go up and down quite noticeably during rewind on bulk >>rolled film. Plastic cannisters are even worse than metal ones. So I >>am saying that the power-torque (not speed) of the PZ-1p is better >>than the ZX's. My current MZ-S's seem better than the ZX series, but >>not quite as strong as the PZ-1p. >> >>Hope this clears things up. >> >> >>Bruce Dayton - 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: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question
Maybe the PZ-1p has more torquey motor(s) - it has more FPS, too. But does it really affect reliability - only time and prolonged use will tell. Maybe the MZ series has less torque to improve longevity, who knows? Does the PZ-1p have one motor just for rewind? IIRC the Canon T-90 had 3 motors. Many cameras have only one. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: Raimo Korhonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 04. tammikuuta 2002 1:00 Aihe: Re: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question >Raimo, > >Yes, but have you been using bulk rolled film? It doesn't roll in and >out of the cannister as smoothly as the manufacturers stuff. I have >several ZX's and had 2 PZ-1p's. When winding and rewinding, the PZ-1p >tends to pull without any change in motor speed (pitch). The ZX's >however, tend to go up and down quite noticeably during rewind on bulk >rolled film. Plastic cannisters are even worse than metal ones. So I >am saying that the power-torque (not speed) of the PZ-1p is better >than the ZX's. My current MZ-S's seem better than the ZX series, but >not quite as strong as the PZ-1p. > >Hope this clears things up. > > >Bruce Dayton > > > >Thursday, January 03, 2002, 2:06:57 PM, you wrote: > >RK> Whaddya mean - strength? Do you mean power output or durability? How do you >measure them? How many motors does the PZ-1p have? >RK> I think that durability is a good thing to have but power (i.e. rewind speed) is >not that important. I had no rewind problems with MZ-5n and no one else has reported >these problems either. I >RK> expect the MZ-S to be even better, of course. >RK> All the best! >RK> Raimo >RK> Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen - 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: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question
Raimo, Yes, but have you been using bulk rolled film? It doesn't roll in and out of the cannister as smoothly as the manufacturers stuff. I have several ZX's and had 2 PZ-1p's. When winding and rewinding, the PZ-1p tends to pull without any change in motor speed (pitch). The ZX's however, tend to go up and down quite noticeably during rewind on bulk rolled film. Plastic cannisters are even worse than metal ones. So I am saying that the power-torque (not speed) of the PZ-1p is better than the ZX's. My current MZ-S's seem better than the ZX series, but not quite as strong as the PZ-1p. Hope this clears things up. Bruce Dayton Thursday, January 03, 2002, 2:06:57 PM, you wrote: RK> Whaddya mean - strength? Do you mean power output or durability? How do you measure them? How many motors does the PZ-1p have? RK> I think that durability is a good thing to have but power (i.e. rewind speed) is not that important. I had no rewind problems with MZ-5n and no one else has reported these problems either. I RK> expect the MZ-S to be even better, of course. RK> All the best! RK> Raimo RK> Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen RK> -Alkuperäinen viesti- RK> Lähettäjä: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> RK> Vastaanottaja: Lawrence Kwan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> RK> Päivä: 03. tammikuuta 2002 20:04 RK> Aihe: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question >>Lawrence, >> >>THe MZ-L or MZ-6 doesn't solve the wind/rewind motor problem. If you >>have used both MZ series bodies and the PZ-1p, there is a world of >>difference in the strength of the motors. >> >>Bruce RK> - RK> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, RK> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to RK> 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[2]: Vs: Re[2]: MZ5 and MZ5n Z1p Question
Shel, They will be new cameras. They have been announced but I don't think they have hit the shelves yet. Bruce Thursday, January 03, 2002, 1:24:53 PM, you wrote: SB> Bruce wrote: >> THe MZ-L or MZ-6 doesn't solve the wind/rewind motor problem. SB> Are these new cameras? I don't think I've ever heard of them. - 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 .
