After following the latest threads with complaints about the features in
various Pentax SLR's (MZ-S, MZ-7 etc.) it's clear to me that the
majority of users wants features, features and nothing but features.
Performance and build quality is of 2nd concern.
This is of course very bad for Pentax si
Roland Mabo wrote:
>
> After following the latest threads with complaints about the features in
> various Pentax SLR's (MZ-S, MZ-7 etc.) it's clear to me that the
> majority of users wants features, features and nothing but features.
Don't forget the 'squeaky wheel' factor: you don't hear much f
I'm pretty sure feature hungry users will defect sooner or later for
the digital and film SLR will remain a build quality niche. So
relax and hold on to our elitist-to-be company...
Servus, Alin ;o)
Roland wrote:
RM> After following the latest threads with complaints about the features
Alin Flaider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisa³ / wrote:
>
> I'm pretty sure feature hungry users will defect sooner or later for
> the digital and film SLR will remain a build quality niche. So
> relax and hold on to our elitist-to-be company...
>
I don't think I'll ever move to a digital are
Artur wrote:
>But what's wrong
> about the demand for features? Is autobracketing so difficult to implement? I don't
> believe it would significantly increase the price. As for the spot metering, mind
>that
> I'd like to be able to get reading from the area narrower than the whole viewfinder
Roland wrote:
> This is of course very bad for Pentax since they have, in contradiction
> to Canon and Minolta, choosen the blessed pathway of good build quality
> and high performance.
Built quality force its way into slr design again because of low volumes. The SLR
market has shrinked signif
Hi Roland,
I'm glad Pentax has taken the path they have, even if their speed on that
path is a little slower than ideal.
Although I've never held a Minolta body, I have held a few Canons. The
Rebels struck me as being almost disposable in quality, if not in price. My
ZX-5n feels a little more so
Dan Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Although I've never held a Minolta body, I have held a few Canons. The
>Rebels struck me as being almost disposable in quality, if not in price. My
>ZX-5n feels a little more solid to me, but, truthfully, I'd prefer to have
>something even more so, could I af
>Buy a view camera, they are cheaper and better for doing what
>the PC lens is supposed to do.
>William Robb
>
This list is just crawling with enablers.
Probably, better advice for me would be, "stop spending money on new gear
until you excede the capabilities of the equipment you already have
- Original Message -
Dan Scott wrote:
> Sometimes I do envy Canon users, but only for one thing--the number of PC
lenses they have available. Fortunately, I can >live with that level of
envy.
to which Bill Robb replied:
>Buy a view camera, they are cheaper and better for doing what the
"Artur Ledóchowski" wrote:
> And I disagree (sorry:() with the statement that MZ-7 has the fastest AF in its
>class.
> I was able to compare it with F60 and EOS 300 and found out that EOS has the fastest
> and most quiet. F60's AF is pretty much like that in MZ-7.
Tests in both Practical Photog
Mark Dalal wrote:
> I second Bill's statement. I've got a friend with a couple of the PC lenses.
> They're nowhere as good as his large format gear.
All of the shift lenses I've played with for 35mm have had dirt poor
coverage, so that you really couldn't shift very far before you got cutoff.
12 matches
Mail list logo
