Re: MZ-M owners/users opinions?

2003-01-02 Thread Tonghang Zhou
On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, wendy beard wrote: > >etc. bodies? > > Yuk? > > I had an MZ-M for about two weeks. Ran a couple of films through it and > couldn't think of any reason to keep it when I had a couple of perfectly > good MXes at home. > It was so light, I had to weight it down with an A35-105 be

Re: MZ-M owners/users opinions?

2003-01-02 Thread Peter Alling
Pretty much they way I look at it. At 09:16 PM 1/2/2003 +1100, you wrote: The difference between cameras and disposables Bob - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Not in my experience, you should be able to pick up a new ZX-M for about > $160 US. > I've not s

Re: MZ-M owners/users opinions?

2003-01-02 Thread Brendan
The MZ-M is not a replacement for the old manual bodies IMHO but it does make a great little back up camera for an AF body, I miss my MZ-M Alot to, thankfully the student who has it is taking good care of it. __ Post your free a

Re: MZ-M owners/users opinions?

2003-01-02 Thread Bob Rapp
The difference between cameras and disposables Bob - Original Message - From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Not in my experience, you should be able to pick up a new ZX-M for about > $160 US. > I've not seen a ME Super for less than about $200, although prices have been > falling

RE: MZ-M owners/users opinions?

2003-01-02 Thread Peter Alling
riginal Message- From: wendy beard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 2003 6:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MZ-M owners/users opinions? At 05:38 PM 01/01/2003 -0500, Dave wrote: >Folks... > >I've been considering getting a body to use with my beauti

Re: MZ-M owners/users opinions?

2003-01-02 Thread Peter Alling
It's adequate for the purpose, I have one for times when I want a camera which can use interchangeable lenses, but I don't want to risk an LX or MX. I'm not in love with the camera, in my opinion it's viewfinder is barely adequate a bit "squinty", with low magnification and low apparent brightness

MZ-M owners/users opinions?

2003-01-01 Thread Paul Franklin Stregevsky
"David Chang-Sang" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Folks... I've been considering getting a body to use with my beautiful 50mm f1.4 SMC-M. I was looking at the MZ-M used. What do you all have to say for this baby compared to the older MX/K1000/K2 etc. bodies? any experiences for those who own an MZ-M?

Re: MZ-M owners/users opinions?

2003-01-01 Thread wendy beard
At 05:38 PM 01/01/2003 -0500, Dave wrote: Folks... I've been considering getting a body to use with my beautiful 50mm f1.4 SMC-M. I was looking at the MZ-M used. What do you all have to say for this baby compared to the older MX/K1000/K2 etc. bodies? Yuk? I had an MZ-M for about two weeks. Ran

Re: MZ-M owners/users opinions?

2003-01-01 Thread Ken Archer
Amen, Brother Robb. On Wednesday 01 January 2003 10:03 pm, William Robb wrote: > The m 50mm f/1.4 is very nice on the ME-Super. -- Ken Archer Canine Photography San Antonio, Texas "Business Is Going To The Dogs"