Let's see if I understand this.
20 years ago we had a K mount with accurate aperature.
Then we had the KA derivatives that were accurate only without using A.
Now we've got KAJ which is accurate using A, and is about as good as K.
Progress and improvement is a marvelous thing.
If Pentax had maintained the all metal quality, all mechanical precision of
the original K series cameras, then this would be a very small list
representing the users of some very pricey gear.
Camera manufacturers these days, unless their plants are entirely in Germany
or Sweden and their pricing
FWIW,
I got my first 35mm SLR in 1984. It was an early graduation present from my
parents so that I could take a B&W class my senior year in college. I
didn't know jack about jack. I went to a Wolf Camera(boy, have they
changed?!) and bought an ME Super with an M 50mm f 2.0. Why did I buy
Pent
20 years ago we had a K mount with accurate aperature.
Not really. 'A' lenses on Super Program in program or shutter priority mode
is no more accurate than current combination. Just that this issue wasn't
raised.
Then we had the KA derivatives that were accurate only without using A.
No less acc
>From Robert & Leigh
>Then, I waited for the next body...the MZ-S. Damn! What an
overpriced,
>overall disappointment. I know it has several great features but not
>freakin' $750-900 worth. Sorry, it just doesn't add up for me. I keep
>reding this list hoping that Pentax will come out with a
Anthony, I agree with every thing you say except "very pricey gear".
Almost nobody WANTS that old stuff anymore. Good post, and you're keeping
me in check. Everyone I know says that's a good thing to do. grin.
Anthony Farr wrote:
If Pentax had maintained the all metal quality, all mechanical pre
Good. Now I'll send you a free screwmount Zenit camera, but you have to
use that one only for the rest of your life. No other gear allowed.
frank theriault wrote:
Mind you, after the Revolution, we'll all have professional digital bodies,
with full backwards and forwards and up and down compatib
On June 17, 2003 08:07 pm, Caveman wrote:
> Good. Now I'll send you a free screwmount Zenit camera, but you have to
> use that one only for the rest of your life. No other gear allowed.
Any chance of making it a Flexaret?
Nick
guys, if you decide to go ahead, pls, don't forget to let me know
when the stuff is up for sale. i might be able to help you with a buck or two
best,
mishka
From: Cameron Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lens Mount Progress
Maybe we could have a joint Ebay auction, with
And we'll all drive Ladas.
-frank
Caveman wrote:
> Good. Now I'll send you a free screwmount Zenit camera, but you have to
> use that one only for the rest of your life. No other gear allowed.
>
--
"What a senseless waste of human life"
-The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch
Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
Canon or Nikon name brand on your camera.priceless.
price-less (pries'lis) adj.
[...]
2. delightfully amusing or absurd
cheers,
caveman
> What shall I do? Big sale and abandon Pentax? Buy Nikon?
Don't be so foolish, buy Canon.
Agree.
regards,
Alan Chan
_
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
fastpat wrote:
> Robert, if you think the MZ-S is overpriced, compare it to
similarly-priced
> cameras in terms of build quality, as well as features.
The MZ-S does not compare at all favourably with the Canon
EOS 3 and Nikon F100. It is obviously better than the Canon
Rebel and Nikon F80 (N80 i
whickersworld wrote:
The MZ-S is not going to win any
converts to Pentax.
But might have the opposite effect.
cheers,
caveman
TECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 18. kesäkuuta 2003 12:28
Aihe: Re: Lens Mount Progress
>whickersworld wrote:
>> The MZ-S is not going to win any
>> converts to Pentax.
>
>But might have the opposite effect.
>
>cheers,
>caveman
>
>In the UK at least, Pentax had to slash the
>selling price of the MZ-S because it offered so much less
>than the F100 at the same price.
You're not kidding. £579 is widespread, and I've seen a £549 somewhere.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=| w
Cotty wrote:
> You're not kidding. £579 is widespread,
> and I've seen a £549 somewhere.
Wow.
That's about half the list price. Let me see ...
£549 / 1.175 =£467.23
Written down over 4 years, less 22% tax = £364.44.
Now *that* is *great* value for money!
Cotty, can you remember w
Raimo Korhonen wrote:
>
> Not likely. It is an unique camera with useful specs.
> Nikon F 100 is not better, it is different.
So you don't find the following F100 features useful?
- Extremely fast and accurate AF with all AF Nikkors
- Even faster AF with AF-S Nikkors (similar to Canon USM)
- 3
whickersworld wrote:
Obviously the shrink advised you to vent your frustration upon pdml
as the cheap alternative to having to get the F100 and afferent
lenses.
;o)
Now seriously, of your long list you can retain the points related
to speed (AF, shutter, etc.) However, these are not
On 19 Jun 2003 at 17:43, Alin Flaider wrote:
>
> whickersworld wrote:
>
> Obviously the shrink advised you to vent your frustration upon pdml
> as the cheap alternative to having to get the F100 and afferent
> lenses.
> ;o)
> Now seriously, of your long list you can retain the points
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, whickersworld wrote:
> So you don't find the following F100 features useful?
>
> - Extremely fast and accurate AF with all AF Nikkors
>
> - Even faster AF with AF-S Nikkors (similar to Canon USM)
>
> - 3D matrix metering with multiple segments
>
> - Support for VR (vibrati
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
If someone would like to have top
specified body, with good choice of ultrasonic driven and with IS (VR)
stabilisation - then of course F100 is clear choice.
Canon EOS 1v. The F100 is for cheapskates that don't want to support the
company through buying new lenses.
che
> I think the MZ-S is a huge disappointment at its price
> point, except for die hard Pentax users who don't want to
> change brands.
I don't agree. The reason I use Pentaxes is they make very nice, small
no-nonsense camera (among others, that is). That's why I use a MX and a
MZ-S. You say that th
John wrote:
It is also true to state that most MZ-S bodies will
never reach the point of breaking a shutter because they
only get light amateur use.
REPLY:
You seem to base this on the assumption that MZ-S contains a shutter not optimized for
durability. This is way off the truth. The MZ-S u
Pål Jensen wrote:
The MZ-S use a shutter designed for 1/8000s but tuned at 1/6000s in
order to increase durability and reliability and reduce power consumption.
The MZ-S is built to professional standard because it is based on a camera that was plannet to cost $8000 and designed for Pentax profes
> Actually there is a camera which is quite a direct rival to the MZ-S -
> Minolta Dynax 7.
I don't agree. Dynax 7 is a very different camera, built with a very
different philosophy.
> It has weaknessess but it also has several strong
> advantages over the MZ-S
Agreed. Still, for me, the advanta
Pål Jensen wrote:
>You seem to base this on the assumption that MZ-S contains
a shutter not optimized for durability. This is way off the
truth.
*Your* assumption is way off the truth, Pål.
Try sticking to facts, because you will have a greater
chance of getting things right.
John
On 03.6.20 7:39 PM, "whickersworld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pål Jensen wrote:
>> You seem to base this on the assumption that MZ-S contains
> a shutter not optimized for durability. This is way off the
> truth.
>
>
>
> *Your* assumption is way off the truth, Pål.
>
> Try sticking to facts
- Original Message -
From: "Lukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lens Mount Progress
> I don't agree. Dynax 7 is a very different camera, built with a very
> different philosophy.
Actually this can be said about any other camera from any ma
On Sat, 21 Jun 2003, whickersworld wrote:
> *Your* assumption is way off the truth, Pål.
>
> Try sticking to facts, because you will have a greater
> chance of getting things right
Pål is right. High durability of MZ-S shutter was mentioned in Canadian
MZ-S brochure. And because this brochure i
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jun 2003, whickersworld wrote:
*Your* assumption is way off the truth, Pål.
Try sticking to facts, because you will have a greater
chance of getting things right
Pål is right. High durability of MZ-S shutter was mentioned in Canadian
MZ-S brochure. And beca
: Lens Mount Progress
>- Original Message -
>From: "Lukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Lens Mount Progress
>
>
>> MZ-S. You say that the MZ-S doesn't compare to its rivals (EOS 3 or F100),
>> but then again one might say t
aupunki.fi/~raikorho
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: whickersworld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 21. kesäkuuta 2003 1:40
Aihe: Re: Lens Mount Progress
>Pål Jensen wrote:
>>You seem to base this on the assumption that MZ-S co
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 21. kesäkuuta 2003 10:25
Aihe: Re: Lens Mount Progress
>Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Jun 2003, whickersworld wrote:
>>
>>
>>>*Your* assumption is way off the truth, Pål.
>>>
>>>Try sticking to
o Korhonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 11:29 AM
Subject: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
> During the last Photokina I learned that Pål has good, reliable sources in
the Pentax circles in Japan. Do you? If not, "try sticking to facts, becau
Has Consumer Report ever tested SLR cameras? Should be interesting if they
did. We don't get the report this side, but if they can tell which is the
bestest peanut butter in the whole wide world surely at least one camera
got
tested.
You will never get the full story from consumer report because i
> > Agreed. Still, for me, the advantages of the MZ-S are more important
than
> > those of the Dynax 7 (that's why I bought the latter :-)
>
> You mean *the former*, don't you?:)
Nah - I'm a Minolta user in disguise ;-)) Of course "the latter", what was I
thinking? Anyway, it was late at night...
I wouldn't put much stock in what CR says about slr's, or any other piece of
photographic equipment.
I recall many years ago, they tested stereo turntables. They basically said,
for each model: "They turn the record around and around. When it's hooked up
to an amp, and you put the stylus to the
CR caters to P. T. Barnum's favorite customers.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: Lens Mount Progr
IL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: Lens Mount Progress
I wouldn't put much stock in what CR says about slr's, or any other piece
of
photographic equipment.
I recall many years ago, they tested stereo turntables. They basically
said,
Caveman wrote:
>
>Just marketing talk (that also inspired
>Paal with the "100% accurate metering" claim).
Exactly. I've learnt a lot from many people on here,
including Pål.
But what sets Pål apart from others here is that he seems
constantly
to confuse his opinions with fact. When Pål is repo
Alan Chan wrote:
>
> You will never get the full story from consumer report
because it takes time
> to show the weakness of certain products. For instances,
some Sigma lenses
> scored well in test reports but degrade quickly
mechanically.
Alan,
I don't know anyone who has bought a Sigma lens tha
On Sat, 21 Jun 2003, Caveman wrote:
> It also mentions impossible things like "Absolute accuracy in focusing
> and metering" and "The flexibility to suit any purpose and any
> photographer". For the shutter they just say "the high performance
> shutter puts the emphasis on reliability and accu
mine has been OK optically. it is not as sharp as i would like in the corners, but it
is not bad.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: "whickersworld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 11:34
Subject: Re: Lens Mount Progress
John wrote:
But what sets Pål apart from others here is that he seems
constantly
to confuse his opinions with fact. When Pål is reporting
fact, he is
clear and concise and almost always right. But he would do
well to
realise that his opinions are just that; his opinions.
I must admit to envy; I
iault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: Lens Mount Progress
> I wouldn't put much stock in what CR says about slr's, or any other piece
of
> photographic equipment.
>
> I recall many years ago, they test
You can't test one camera to determine the designed MTBF of the shutter.
For a manufacturer, a shutter designed for 100,000 cycles means that
very few would fail before 100,000 cycles. It would all depend on how
similar one shutter would be in terms of manufacturing/process tolerance
and what p
Caveman wrote:
All in order to have a sane argument.
REPLY:
You have been using this term "sane" or "sane discussion/argument" several times
during the last couple of weeks. I wonder why?
For anyone who have followed the various threads you have been involved with
recently, it is obvious tha
Fra: Bruce Rubenstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 22. juni 2003 03:06
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Re: Lens Mount Progress
You can't test one camera to determine the designed MTBF of the shutter.
For a manufacturer, a shutter designed for 100,000 cycles means that
very few would
> -Original Message-
> From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> Hi
> I shoot (for private use) appr. 1 roll of film a week.
> If the shutter lasts 100.000 cycles, it would last me appr.
> 50 years!
> Pretty good, eh?
It would last me approximately 1 year! Pretty crappy, eh?
tv
--- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Rubenstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2003 3:05 AM
Subject: Re: Lens Mount Progress
> You can't test one camera to determine the designed MTBF of the shutter.
> For a manufacturer, a shut
Aren't you the guy that said that 100% can mean 99% or any other figure.
"Insane" was the first word that came to my mind.
It is also insane to claim that a meter can be 100% accurate, and do
that in 10 messages in a row, without blinking.
Your obstination in trying to insult me is remarkable.
Get your facts straight again.
1) "measurbator" is about people obsessed with 100% accurate metering;
I've noticed only one until now
2) I have used the word "liar" only once, in this context:
"I read a lot of "pro" advice and discussion about how it should
actually be "rated" at 40, and how Fu
Pål Jensen wrote:
REPLY:
A meter is designed to assign whatever it is metering to a calibrated value.
Seems that you have some serious problems with the definition of a
meter. If you are against dictionaries, please feel free to use for the
scope of this discussion *the* reference: "Internationa
And you have sunk to his level, which is exactly what he was seeking.
Pål Jensen wrote:
> Oh give me a break! You have been insulting this whole forum the last couple of
> weeks by claiming people that disagree with you are "measurebators", liars, cheats,
> pretenders, snapshooters, not able to
- Original Message -
From: Paul Stenquist
Subject: Re: Lens Mount Progress !!
> My LX, with the ISO resistor upgrade, has never failed to meter
> correctly. Perhaps I'm just lucky. Some of my Spotmatics get a little
> iffy now and again. But, like me, they're getting
- Original Message -
From: Caveman
Subject: Re: Lens Mount Progress !!
> What you described is called "consistency". For "accuracy" you need to
> refer to the difference between the real value and the one indicated
by
> the meter.
Accuracy is the part wh
Użytkownik fastpat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał:
>Robert, if you think the MZ-S is overpriced, compare it to similarly-priced
>cameras in terms of build quality, as well as features. It\'s built to a
>noticeably higher standard than any other 35mm in the present Pentax line.
>I have to agree with a
TED]>
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 18. kesäkuuta 2003 11:26
Aihe: Re: Re: Lens Mount Progress
>Użytkownik fastpat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał:
>>Robert, if you think the MZ-S is overpriced, compare it to similarly-priced
>>cameras in terms of b
- Original Message -
From: "Raimo Korhonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Vs: Re: Lens Mount Progress
> MZ-S is a bit overpriced but it has all the features I need and more.
Great camera, all who have tested it have liked it.
That is something beyond any dispute. I do
Rob wrote:
RS> The Leica/Voigt lenses which were mentioned earlier by John fit neither an F100
RS> or MZ-S and obviously aren't AF or Auto anything, makes me wonder :-)
Nah, we are all creatures of multiple personalities, we must
satisfy each one's cravings. ;o)
Servus, Alin
AIL PROTECTED]>
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 20. kesäkuuta 2003 23:16
Aihe: Re: Lens Mount Progress
- Original Message -
From: "Lukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lens Mount Progress
MZ-S. You say that the MZ-S doesn'
Advantages? Name one.
I know this will make a lot of people "not happy", but the latest Japan CAPA
June magazine didn't compared the MZ-S to any F5/EOS1v/9 (1st group), or
F100/EOS3/N1 (2nd group). And you know what? They compared it to other mid
end bodies F80/EOS7/7/NX (3rd group), yet still s
In terms of features, no doubt Minolta 7 wins the game. But in terms of
built quality, I have yet to strip down a MZ-S to be certain. You can't
judge the quality from the "shell" only.
regards,
Alan Chan
DMF (Direct Manual Focus) Mode (Custom 22-2) - This mode allows the
photographers to fine-t
In a message dated 6/21/03 3:34:06 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
I agree with you Raimo. What's the deal about attacking Pål every time he
says something? I personally, have more respect for what Pål says than most
people on this list. I'd hate to lose his opinions and his forecasts — right or
Caveman wrote:
Just marketing talk (that also inspired Paal with the "100% accurate metering" claim).
REPLY:
It is based on experience as usual not marketing talk. Meters that are 100% for what
they are calibrated for is something thats taken for granted these days.
Your insistence on this iss
On 03.6.21 5:29 AM, "Raimo Korhonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> During the last Photokina I learned that Pål has good, reliable sources in the
> Pentax circles in Japan.
Wasn't Pål the one who correctly predicted that the name of the new series
was *ist when none of us had the faintest clue?
C
There's no meter with 100% accuracy. If you didn't know that, you're
entitled to ask for a refund for your physics courses. It might allow
for buying a new lens or something.
cheers,
caveman
Pål Jensen wrote:
Caveman wrote:
Just marketing talk (that also inspired Paal with the "100% accurate me
Alan Chan wrote:
>
> I know this will make a lot of people "not happy", but the
latest Japan CAPA
> June magazine didn't compared the MZ-S to any F5/EOS1v/9
(1st group), or
> F100/EOS3/N1 (2nd group). And you know what? They compared
it to other mid
> end bodies F80/EOS7/7/NX (3rd group), yet still
Caveman wrote:
There's no meter with 100% accuracy. If you didn't know that, you're entitled to ask
for a refund for your physics courses. It might allow for buying a new lens or
something.
REPLY:
As usual this is one of your anal retentive (did anyone use the word measurbator?),
wild goose ch
- Original Message -
From: "Caveman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
> DMF (Direct Manual Focus) Mode (Custom 22-2) -
Also the excellent, bright viewfinder, DOF value display, last-4-films
exposure data storage (with the option to plug in an
- Original Message -
From: "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
> In terms of features, no doubt Minolta 7 wins the game. But in terms of
> built quality, I have yet to strip down a MZ-S to be certain. You can't
> judge the
I completely disagree. The MZ-S is an outstanding camera, very much in the
same class as the LX. Understated, features photographers can use, and very well
built. If you have never used one you wouldn't know just how good they are. I
got one today and can't believe how outstanding it is. It is m
On 21 Jun 2003 at 23:42, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I completely disagree. The MZ-S is an outstanding camera, very much in the same
> class as the LX. Understated, features photographers can use, and very well
> built. If you have never used one you wouldn't know just how good they are. I
> got on
Hi,
Sunday, June 22, 2003, 7:51:18 PM, you wrote:
> Hi
> I shoot (for private use) appr. 1 roll of film a week.
> If the shutter lasts 100.000 cycles, it would last me appr. 50 years!
> Pretty good, eh? That's is if I don't fire it without having loaded the
> camrea with film - which I do frequen
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: Bob Walkden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Vastaanottaja: Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 22. kesäkuuta 2003 21:04
Aihe: Re: VS.: Lens Mount Progress
>Hi,
>
>Sunday, June 22, 2003, 7:51:18 PM, you wrote:
>
>> Hi
>> I shoot (for private use
t;
Päivä: 18. kesäkuuta 2003 14:04
Aihe: Re: Vs: Re: Lens Mount Progress
>Raimo Korhonen wrote:
>> MZ-S is a bit overpriced but it has all the features I need and more. Great camera,
>> all who have tested it have liked it.
>> All the best!
>> Raimo
&
PROTECTED]
Emne: Re: SV: Lens Mount Progress-Topic change? at end
Exactly Jens. We all like to have nice little toys but in the end it's the
person playing with the toys that make them work.
To answer your question. Right now I would take an MZ-S over the *istD any
day. I think the istD is gre
Ken wrote:
I believe Pål is right on this account. I remember reading a Japanese
magazine article where Pentax designers were discussing the process of
designing the MZ-S, wherein they said that one of the most difficult tasks
was to keep the power consumption within a limit (it's still a battery
Raimo Korhonen wrote:
No, I have not had the pleasure. How many films have you put through one? And through MZ-S?
All the best!
Raimo
That's a good question, Raimo. It's interesting to observe how some
people who have never used a MZ-S are bashing it, and praising other
cameras, that they have
Carlos wrote:
Other ones haven't jumped ship yet, but seem to argue for the sake of
it.
REPLY:
It is not a case of arguing for the sake of it. It is a case of denigrating anything
the said person don't use in order to justify what he do use. In this way any argument
for using this or that fea
- Original Message -
From: "Raimo Korhonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Vs: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
> OK, how many rolls have you put through the Dynax and how many through
MZ-S?
None.
But I have the constant access to the Dynax 7 as my best friend uses it and
s
- Original Message -
From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
> It is you who don't get the point that built quality costs and for many it
is worth paying for. I can fully understand that not all want to pay extra
for built
day, June 22, 2003 08:46
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
> Both of you seem not to get the point. I have NEVER bashed the MZ-S for
> anything except its too high price. My point was that if one is about to
> make his choice about an advanced camera, usually compares features and
&
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Päivä: 22. kesäkuuta 2003 20:10
Aihe: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
>- Original Message -
>From: "Raimo Korhonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Vs: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
>
>> OK, how many rolls have you pu
- Original Message -
From: "Raimo Korhonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Vs: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
> But you have not used either. Your opinions should be classified under
educated guesses, at best.
My opinions are as good as those of the people who are about t
Some people on the PDML seem to go blindly furious whenever any one says
anything against the MZ-S. They forget the context and attack such person
as
if everything was a personal matter. There's no place for a normal exchange
of opinions - one is allowed only to constantly repeat words of praise f
Not true at all! You claim that the MZ-S is overpriced as if it was a fact,
when in reality you simply means that you don't want to pay that kind of
money for that camera. Thats OK. However, you won't find any better built
and better specified 35mm slr cheaper than the MZ-S. It is the cheapest
This doesn't necessarily constitutes a comercial success. It may be made of
whatever you can imagine - if the price is not competitive, nobody will buy
it except for a few hobbyists.
There is the manufacturing cost, and then there is the demand-supply factor.
I guess we could not determine if it w
Time to order one from Japan. :-)
regards,
Alan Chan
i was looking for a $500 street price Pentax body and the MZ-S is spec'd
like the competition's $500 street price bodies at $800 street price.
_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection
Hi Lon,
Well worth the price (which was U$D1400). Ergonomically excellent, don't
like the back cover very much though. Seems very flimsy, like its gonna pop
off at any moment. Dosn't feel the same as the rest of the camera, almost
like it was designed after the fact. Mind you its pretty curvaceous
all other rangefinder cameras are close to Leica's price.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Lukasz Kacperczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2003 18:39
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
> > i was looking fo
The Leica says Leica on the front. The Leica uses Zeiss lenses. When you
understand what these two things mean the comparison is over.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, we seem to be doing a lot of comparison with the MZS to Nikon or
Canon. But take a look at the Leica R9.
Herb Chong wrote:
a Leica is for bragging rights about "how seriously i take my photography".
>
But a Leica is also a wonderful machine. If one tales delight in the
camera as a machine, then a Leica is the ultimate goal. And the classic
Leicas may well be the most rewarding. Take a iiif or a ii
My father used a screwmount Leica as a "tie tack" and a Spotmatic for taking
pictures - go figure:-)
Bob
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 8:06 AM
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens M
Alan,
You get no points at all, not even partial credit... A price is
reasonable and not excessive, inadequate, or unfairly discriminatory if
it is an actuarially sound estimate of the expected value of all costs
associated with the production and sale of the merchandise.
cheers,
caveman
Alan
build? i decided it made no difference. i
spent the money on lenses.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2003 18:06
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
> But a Leica is als
No, I know working photographers who just prefer a Leica rangefinder
over anything else. There is also the issue of the look of Leitz lenses.
Many people who have the money for a Leica have no need to brag about
how much they have. I think it's really envy on the part of the have-nots.
BR
[EMA
On 22 Jun 2003 at 21:37, Herb Chong wrote:
> but then you are not looking for a Leica. women like Gucci handbags.
> photographers like Leica's. i wouldn't mind having a nice M7, but i am sure that
> it will not help me take better pictures. that is my first priority. a Leica is
> for bragging righ
CTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2003 22:43
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
> You might just be surprised. Take one to Paris next time you're there. Don't
> expect it to improve your natural landscape photography though.
>
1 - 100 of 174 matches
Mail list logo
