Posting in case someone is looking for either:
B&H has an F 100mm macro in 9 condition for $299.
Adorama has an MZ-S in E+ condition for $524.
Tom Reese
ilto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 08 May, 2005 12:05 AM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: MZ-S (WAS: Re: Camera prices on Ebay)
>
>
> on 6.05.2005 14:13, Pål Jensen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Sure, the eyepiece is of plastic but isn't that true for all
on 8.05.2005 0:12, Henri Toivonen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Good way to check.. NOT!
> Don't you ever do that again! *pulls ear*
Ahhh, I was naughty :-) But careful too, so I didn't cause any damage
:-)
--
Best regards
Sylwek
Sylwiusz wrote:
on 6.05.2005 14:13, Pål Jensen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure, the eyepiece is of plastic but isn't that true for all slr's made today?
Eypiece in MZ-S is made of coated glass - I've checked this by knocking at
that with metal screwdriver - produced soun
on 6.05.2005 14:13, Pål Jensen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Sure, the eyepiece is of plastic but isn't that true for all slr's made today?
Eypiece in MZ-S is made of coated glass - I've checked this by knocking at
that with metal screwdriver - produced sound couldn't
On May 7, 2005, at 12:13 AM, Pål Jensen wrote:
Sure, the eyepiece is of plastic but isn't that true for all slr's
made today?
A plastic eyepiece isn't such a bad thing. My glasses have an
antireflective coating which is nowhere near as robust as SMC. The
reason I also had contact lenses pre
Pål Jensen wrote:
Carlos wrote:
According to Richard Hunecke's books about the MZ-5/3/5n (sorry if I have
mispelled his name, I have one of my cats on my lap and cannot go to check it)
the internal chassis of those cameras is made of metal (light alloy diecast).
REPLY:
Really? I could swear it w
All I did (as I also used to do with my MZ-5) was putting a rubber
string cut out from a waste black bicycle inner tyre around the eyecup
to prevent loosing this. Some day I discovered that the eyecup of the
MZ-S got loose on one side because of the broken plastic edge.
Henk
> -Origi
> Hi Pål:
> The author says so in his book, that under the plastic panels there
> is a robust diecast body, with a very stable shape, and torsion
> resistant. Anyway this is only a second translation of a bad translation.
> I haven't dismantled my MZ-5 or MZ-S, I am n
> > Mine must be the rare one with metal inside then, I also have an even
> > rarer
> > MZ-3 with metal inside 8)
>
> Ouch...
Meant in good humour, no offence.
John
that under the plastic panels there is a
robust diecast body, with a very stable shape, and torsion resistant.
Anyway this is only a second translation of a bad translation.
I haven't dismantled my MZ-5 or MZ-S, I am not so curious, and I don't
possess the abilities shown by several me
--- John Whittingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I've seen a dismantled MZ-5n and it is totally plastic.
>
> Mine must be the rare one with metal inside then, I also have an even rarer
> MZ-3 with metal inside 8)
Ouch...
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
Yahoo! Mail
S
- Original Message -
From: "Pål Jensen"
Subject: Re: MZ-S (WAS: Re: Camera prices on Ebay)
even the cogs in the film transport that were made of different colors as
well - red, yellow, blue etc..
At least we now know that Nguyen isn't colour blind
ww
Carlos wrote:
According to Richard Hunecke's books about the MZ-5/3/5n (sorry if I have
mispelled his name, I have one of my cats on my lap and cannot go to check it)
the internal chassis of those cameras is made of metal (light alloy diecast).
REPLY:
Really? I could swear it was an MZ-5 I sa
> According to Richard Hunecke's books about the MZ-5/3/5n (sorry if I
> have mispelled his name, I have one of my cats on my lap and cannot
> go to check it) the internal chassis of those cameras is made of
> metal
> (light alloy diecast).
Yes correct, I'm not sure of the exact material but I
John Whittingham escribió:
I've seen a dismantled MZ-5n and it is totally plastic.
Mine must be the rare one with metal inside then, I also have an even rarer
MZ-3 with metal inside 8)
According to Richard Hunecke's books about the MZ-5/3/5n (sorry if I
have mispelled his name, I have one of my
> I've seen a dismantled MZ-5n and it is totally plastic.
Mine must be the rare one with metal inside then, I also have an even rarer
MZ-3 with metal inside 8)
John
don't tell me the mirror box is metal,
because the person who told me the detail could distinguish the difference
between
the screws being used on plastic & on metal structure, and I compare the mirror
box
between the MZ-S & the ZX-10, they are both the same (thick plastic wall etc)
itical part of the MZ-S, it is very disappointing to conclude
> that there are weak plastic parts.
Was it subjected to any impact? I am surprised the plastic edges that hold the
eyecup broke off. Though I don't have the MZ-S, I have been using Refconverter
A &
Magnifier F on all my c
--- UncaMikey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A small and light plastic camera is a joy for me to handle and operate,
> and consequently I am more likely to have the camera with me when I
> want it.
I absolutely agree, especially when smaller & lighter lenses are used. Just that
when a heavy lens is
I had a problem of very simply breaking off a part of the plastic edge
of the viewfinder. The rubber eyecup did no longer stay on. I glued on
the broken part and am hoping that the eyecup will hold. Though this may
not be critical part of the MZ-S, it is very disappointing to conclude
that there
--- Alan Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But really, I like my plastic
> ZX-10 quite a lot. It's lighter with less vibration
I know the metal vs plastic debates are almost as consuming as the ones
on film vs digital, and no final answer is possible, but I will chime
in here and say I am very gl
--- Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you remove the magnesium bottom plate of the MZ-S you'll find a steel plate
> underneath it bolted onto the ultra rigid outer shell. On this the tripod
> socket
> are mounted. As the strong steel plate is as long as the bott
Alan wrote:
I don't know about that, I have never seen any picture indicates MZ-S has the
metal
frame like D/DS. I think D is the first Pentax body with such design. There is
no
practical difference whether to use metal or plastic mount if it was fastened
onto a
plastic structure. MZ-S ca
Alan wrote:
"But if I remember
correctly, Pal
emphasized many times that the MZ-S was the strongest built Pentax 135 body.
But if
it's inner structure was the same/similar as other MZ/ZX bodies, how was that
possible?"
REPLY:
It isn't possible...
Alan:
Not that I am
Alan wrote:
But talking about the MZ-S, I have been told it's
actually a
plastic camera inside, just like other MZ/ZX bodies, with magnesium alloy shells
only.
REPLY:
This is utter bullshit. I've seen the internals of my MZ-S and it is not
remotely built like other MZ-series
ip of an MZ-S, complete with BG-10
grip and instruction manual, I fear it will have to be sold. ...
Price for PDML: $525 for the kit, includes shipping in the continental
U.S.
If I were intent on shooting film anymore, I'd grab this in a
heartbeat. But I'm watching my pennies ... I wil
couple of
> months, I may just do that. But for an extra AF body, I suppose a used
> PZ 1 would fit the bill nicely for a couple of hundred or more less
> than the MZ S...
> Sid
> On Mar 15, 2005, at 12:09 PM, Joe Wilensky wrote:
>
> > We're in the process of purchasin
at all Hmm...Well, if you still have it in a couple of
months, I may just do that. But for an extra AF body, I suppose a used
PZ 1 would fit the bill nicely for a couple of hundred or more less
than the MZ S...
Sid
On Mar 15, 2005, at 12:09 PM, Joe Wilensky wrote:
We're in the proce
Thanks, John, I had forgotten to update that. They don't always tell
me when they change the URL, you know ... ;-)
Joe
Joe,
As the Editor, you perhaps ought to know that your link to your
august organ is out of date.
Regards
John
--
Joe Wilensky
Editor, Cornell Chronicle
Cornell News Office
31
Do you have an easy payment plan?
What if I whimper and whine a bit?
Maybe tales of my terrible and pathetic childhood?
Don ;-)
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Wilensky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 12:10 PM
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Su
Joe,
As the Editor, you perhaps ought to know that your link to your august
organ is out of date.
Regards
John
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:09:36 -0500, Joe Wilensky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote, inter alia:
We're in the process of purchasing the minivan our growing family
needs,.
Joe
http:
We're in the process of purchasing the minivan our growing family
needs, and, as the purchase is coming a bit earlier than planned, it
would really help to have a little extra cash around. So although I
am enjoying my second brief ownership of an MZ-S, complete with BG-10
grip and instru
Joe,
My page 115 says:
(F6) Setting both autofocusing and autoexposure metering with the AF button
When you press the AF button, you can autofocus only or autofocus and
lock the autoexposure reading at the same time
.Pentax Function no. (F6)
.Setting No.
(1)...Autofocus only (no AE lock)
(2)...Auto
Manual: "Copyright 2001".
I imagine the designers felt it more logical if the AF
button were to operate this combination.
The referenced manual info is in the lower push- pin
"MEMO" under the page 115 [F6} heading. It may be that
you're looking for wording other than appears there.
Sorry if I conf
I don't see that in my copy -- do you have a revised manual?
And of course, the obvious question to the fact that the AE lock
button's operation is nullified is -- why?
Joe
Thanks! I understood that the point of the initial
post was to learn if anyone else had experienced this
operational "quirk"
y question was that when the AF button is set up to
> be able to lock
> both AF and AE (a PF setting option), this actually
> completely
> _disables_ the AE-L button so that it no longer has
> any effect when
> pressed. It's an odd quirk, because although the AF
> and A
have the
press-the-shutter-button-halfway feature _not_ lock focus at all, so
the combinations are too plentiful, it seems!
Joe
As I recall, someone asked about an MZ-S "quirk"
wherein PF #6 setting would not permit a hold of both
focus and exposure.
I checked my MZ-S and found that it
As I recall, someone asked about an MZ-S "quirk"
wherein PF #6 setting would not permit a hold of both
focus and exposure.
I checked my MZ-S and found that it will not when the
shutter release is partially depressed, but does when
the AF button on the back is depressed.
I may not
Mine does exactly the same and I also regret that it does. Setting the AF button
up for AF + AE-L would give this button at least some meaning.
Regards,
Sven
Zitat von Joe Wilensky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I grabbed a like new MZ-S from KEH last month (it truly was like new,
> a
I grabbed a like new MZ-S from KEH last month (it truly was like new,
and only four rolls had gone through it based on the data imprinting
count -- I don't think it was reset, either, because it looked like it
had never been used at all). I had borrowed an MZ-S from a list member
brie
ruary 14, 2005 1:53 PM
Subject: MZ-S Question
I was out shooting yesterday and my MZ-S did something i never did before.
Sometimes right after taking a shot it beeped 4 times other than that it
seems to function normally. I haven't processed the film yet so I don't
know if there
Patrick Genovese wrote on 14.02.05 13:48:
> Are you sure coz it seems to do it even at the beginning of a roll.
Yes, I am sure and it is mentioned in the manual. But if it happens at the
beginning of the roll, then something is rather wrong.
--
Balance is the ultimate good...
Best Regards
Sylwe
Are you sure coz it seems to do it even at the beginning of a roll.
Patrick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patrick Genovese wrote on 14.02.05 12:53:
Sometimes right after taking a shot it beeped 4 times other than that it
seems to function normally. I haven't processed the film yet so I don't
know if
Patrick Genovese wrote on 14.02.05 12:53:
> Sometimes right after taking a shot it beeped 4 times other than that it
> seems to function normally. I haven't processed the film yet so I don't
> know if there are any "bad" shots. Does anyone know what this means coz
> I could'nt find any explanatio
I was out shooting yesterday and my MZ-S did something it never did before.
Sometimes right after taking a shot it beeped 4 times other than that it
seems to function normally. I haven't processed the film yet so I don't
know if there are any "bad" shots. Does anyone know wh
I was out shooting yesterday and my MZ-S did something i never did before.
Sometimes right after taking a shot it beeped 4 times other than that it
seems to function normally. I haven't processed the film yet so I don't
know if there are any "bad" shots. Does anyone know wh
Andy,
You'll wish you'd never have parted with the 35/2.
It's in may respects a much better lens than the 43. Really.
Collin
"You impress at a distance, but you impact a life up close. The closer the
relationship the greater the impact."
Howard Hendricks
Jeesh Mark... I wish I have a 43 to swap with your 35/2
If you wanna sell it, give me a shout...
Cheers
Andy
-Original Message-
From: Lindamood, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 1:41 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: MZ-S Small-down
Okay
Okay, here's my little dilemma. I want to small-up/simple-down for
portability, which includes getting a hand strap (not a grip strap) for my MZ-S
and swapping my FA 35mm f2.0 lens for the 43mm limited. I wish like heck that
the new DA 40mm would work on the MZ-S but apparently it's
At 7:38 AM +0100 1/24/05, Jens Bladt wrote:
Agree.
The only problem with the MZ-S is that it came 10 yeras to late. It would
have been a huge success if they made it at the same time as the PZ-1p. The
good thing about it is that it came so late: Now it's posible to get a
almost new one :-)
An
Agree.
The only problem with the MZ-S is that it came 10 yeras to late. It would
have been a huge success if they made it at the same time as the PZ-1p. The
good thing about it is that it came so late: Now it's posible to get a
almost new one :-)
And for me it was hard to get used to the &qu
I should have been more clear, in my mind, "best film body" is more
like "most advanced body": if you consider AF 35mm bodies (because
that's what I'm considering, I do not hesitate btween LX and Ist-Ds,
the point is not there) id not see any other competition to the
John,
The size issue has been interesting. The big lenses go on the PZ1 or
PZ1-p with grip strap attached. But I have new joy using my smaller
autofocus primes. The MZ-S and limited lenses are a sweet
combination... and didn't feel this way on the PZ-1p.
Regards, Bob S.
On Sun, 23 Jan 20
I LOVE my LX. I may eventually sell most of my film cameras. I won't sell my LX.
Paul
>
> > When the MZ-S came out -- and when I was able to check one out in the store
> > (there was a significant interval between these) I concluded, based on
> > comparing specs
When the MZ-S came out -- and when I was able to check one out in the store
(there was a significant interval between these) I concluded, based on
comparing specs and then on comparing the cameras, that for me the MZ-s could
not replace the PZ-1. I thought at the time that the only way I&#
Again, stuck on the back of the Pentax glass, anything looks odd;
the 80-200/2.8 doesn't match either the PZ-1p or the MZ-S, and
niether do any of the other FA* lenses.
The A*200/2.8 looks quite nice on either body, though.
Peter Smekal mused:
>
> but what about colour. Z-1p
Quoting Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'm a new owner of the MZ-S, so I haven't got any final impressions
> yet, but I'd initially rank the PZ-1p and MZ-S at the top of the list.
> ...the PZ-1p is best for flash compensation, high top shutter speed
> (1/8000
Well yeah I know, and all the goood leses ... what DO YOU think? I think
the zip is be the best so far ... almost if not better than the MZ-S which
well ... you know keep the zip and wait for the *ist!
>Well I already own quite a few bodies (at least for an amateur, I
>really do not hav
but what about colour. Z-1p is ... well .. nicer
>
>There again, size (within reason) was never a primary factor for me.
>Most of the time the camera will be stuck on the back of large, heavy
>glass; at least an 80-200/2.8, and usually something even larger.
Bob Sullivan mused:
>
> ...the PZ-1p is best for flash compensation, high top shutter speed
> (1/8000), and fast winding speed (3.5fps)
I believe Pentax actually claim 4.3fps for the PZ-1p; (Boz shows 4)
Good point about the flash compensation, though; I missed that one.
> ...The
I'm a new owner of the MZ-S, so I haven't got any final impressions
yet, but I'd initially rank the PZ-1p and MZ-S at the top of the list.
...the PZ-1p is best for flash compensation, high top shutter speed
(1/8000), and fast winding speed (3.5fps), plus it is comfortable if
somew
Thibouille mused:
>
> Well I already own quite a few bodies (at least for an amateur, I
> really do not have much experience) and I really dunno if I should
> spend money on an MZ-S.
>
> I use (some are own by my brother but as he do not use them anyway...)
>
> P30t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
want to upgrade to the latest digital Pentax. The MZ-S is the best
Pentax film body, period.
You think so? Of 35mm film bodies, I would have thought the PZ-1p a contender
for "best", and the PZ-1 very, very close
On Sun, 23 Jan 2005, Bob Sullivan wrote:
> My urge to buy it came from thinking about it as the LAST Pentax film
> camera.
It is not really (*ist is).
Kostas
ebay auction paying $580 for a MZ-S.
I've only put a few rolls thru the camera but I do like it. It is
more compact than the Z1, closer in size and weight to the LX. It
also has fast autofocus features. I've been happy with it and the
professional feel it gives.
My urge to buy it cam
Quoting Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> want to upgrade to the latest digital Pentax. The MZ-S is the best
> Pentax film body, period.
You think so? Of 35mm film bodies, I would have thought the PZ-1p a contender
for "best", and the PZ-1 very, very close to it.
I m
Well I already own quite a few bodies (at least for an amateur, I
really do not have much experience) and I really dunno if I should
spend money on an MZ-S.
I use (some are own by my brother but as he do not use them anyway...)
P30t
Z1 (not -p)
Super-A + MotorA
KX
Is a fifth one really worth it
T me it's not really digital or film. It's both. Film for me is mostly MF,
though. If I could afford it, I'd certainly get myself a MZ-S again - it's a
brilliant camera. Perhaps I will some day.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig
At 7:18 PM +0100 1/22/05, Thibouille wrote:
What is, for you all, a "normal" price for an MZ-S.
I know it is good state (at least) but do not know much more for now
until I get more information.
Is there anything special I should ensure ?
I received my new MZ-S yesterday. $750 from Ad
ROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 7:18 PM +0100 1/22/05, Thibouille wrote:
> >What is, for you all, a "normal" price for an MZ-S.
> >I know it is good state (at least) but do not know much more for now
> >until I get more information.
> >
> >Is there anything
> Thibouille wroteA;> I'm considering a purchase. But these beast seem pretty
> rare, even on Ebay..I sold my laptop so have a couple hundreds euros to spend
> :) and in my
> opinion, digital is simply not mature enough.
Youre right where I was a year ago. Although you might say I was even more
all caps (flash shoe, remote connection etc.) should be
present.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Thibouille [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 22. januar 2005 19:18
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: MZ-S: what is a good price
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:18:04 +0100, Thibouille wrote:
>What is, for you all, a "normal" price for an MZ-S.
>I know it is good state (at least) but do not know much more for now
>until I get more information.
>
>Is there anything special I should ensure ?
Back in Septemb
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005, Thibouille wrote:
> What is, for you all, a "normal" price for an MZ-S.
Shop price in the UK for a Mint/Mint- one is around 400GBP. Ebay price
is more or less the same in my experience.
HTH,
Kostas
What is, for you all, a "normal" price for an MZ-S.
I know it is good state (at least) but do not know much more for now
until I get more information.
Is there anything special I should ensure ?
Thanks
Thibouille
New !
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3864560521
AIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Help!
> >
> > I purchased a used BG-10 battery grip for my MZ-S.
> > It offers two settings for battery type, but which
> > is which?
> >
> > Of course, Pentax does not have this manual on their
> >
Bob,
You may have the info you need, but in case-
BG-10 battery grip designation "LR6" to be set when
using alkaline and "Li" when using litium.
Jack
--- Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Help!
>
> I purchased a used BG-10 battery grip for my MZ-S.
&
Bob Sullivan a écrit :
Help!
I purchased a used BG-10 battery grip for my MZ-S.
It offers two settings for battery type, but which is which?
Of course, Pentax does not have this manual on their web site.
Can anybody out there with a BG-10 grip give me some pointers.
See my web (French
Bob Sullivan escribió:
Help!
I purchased a used BG-10 battery grip for my MZ-S.
It offers two settings for battery type, but which is which?
Of course, Pentax does not have this manual on their web site.
Can anybody out there with a BG-10 grip give me some pointers.
The manual says: "[LR6]:
Help!
I purchased a used BG-10 battery grip for my MZ-S.
It offers two settings for battery type, but which is which?
Of course, Pentax does not have this manual on their web site.
Can anybody out there with a BG-10 grip give me some pointers.
Thanks, Bob S.
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Blakely"
Subject: Re: MZ-S
Huh? What? Who? Where's the war?
Gimme a chance to gather my weapons of satire and "colorful"
metaphors...slings and arrows of fake righteous indignation.
NORM!
Stop that.
William Robb
7;re joking...
Norman Baugher wrote:
Bill just woke up.let's hope Blakely doesn't stir.
Norm
William Robb wrote:
From: "Jack Davis"
Subject: Re: MZ-S
You are a 'pill'.
You sure are a testy fuck for someone who has to ask a stupid question
like "why should I b
om: "wendy beard"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 08/12/04 20:35:50
I like my MZ-S very much. Despite owning three
digiSLRs I took it out for a spin a couple of weeks
ago just because I enjoyed using it. In fact I'm even
thinkng of selling my *istD to encour
--- Nick Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Generally I prefer the MZ-S alone. I've got the ERC
> and the small and medium fronts. The first is great
> for the primes, and the latter for the 24-90. That
> doesn't see much action though.
>
> Nick
>
I r
I've been using NiMH batteries in my MZ-S since I got the BG-10 in
February 2002, with no ill effects. I leave the battery selector on
"Alkaline".
I also use them in the AF-360 flash, again without troubles. I don't
know about older flashes.
The only problem with these bat
On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 21:14:37 +0100, Carlos Royo wrote:
> I don't find the shutter release button in the BG-10 to be misplaced,
> at least for my hands.
I agree.
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
problem with the BG-10 is a
surprising design blunder. If I do finally order the
MZ-S, I'll include the grip for purposes of extendeng
the available power.
The IR would be nice, but is it true that it only
works from the front of the camera? When I read that
their was
Carlos Royo escribió:
Jack Davis escribió:
Nick,
Appreciate your comments.
The shutter release problem with the BG-10 is a
surprising design blunder. If I do finally order the
MZ-S, I'll include the grip for purposes of extendeng
the available power.
I don't find the shutter release but
Jack Davis escribió:
Nick,
Appreciate your comments.
The shutter release problem with the BG-10 is a
surprising design blunder. If I do finally order the
MZ-S, I'll include the grip for purposes of extendeng
the available power.
I don't find the shutter release button in the BG-10 to be
Nick,
Appreciate your comments.
The shutter release problem with the BG-10 is a
surprising design blunder. If I do finally order the
MZ-S, I'll include the grip for purposes of extendeng
the available power.
The IR would be nice, but is it true that it only
works from the front of the camera?
hed.
The IR is useful, but that should have been built into the body in the first
place.
As I'm often carrying the MZ-S with the *istD kit the extra bulk and weight of
the grip tends to stay at home.
Incidentally, does anyone know if NiMh batteries are OK in the grip? I t only
mentions alk
Carlos,
Good information. Thanks!
Jack
--- Carlos Royo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jack Davis escribió:
> > Still would appreciate almost any opinion as to
> auto
> > focus/motor drive aspects of the MZ-S.
> >
>
> Hello, Jack:
> I have had an MZ-S for t
Jack Davis escribió:
Bob,
Your response is appreciated.
I haven't double checked this, but I thought the fps
was designed to be something like 2.5.
Hope it serves you well.
It is 2.5 fps, with or without the BG-10
Jack Davis escribió:
Still would appreciate almost any opinion as to auto
focus/motor drive aspects of the MZ-S.
Hello, Jack:
I have had an MZ-S for three years, and although I'm not rich enough to
own an FA 28-70 2.8, I use a Tokina 28-70 2.6-2.8 ATX Pro II on this
camera, and also an F
gt; > Mountain this year.
> > He had somebody's MZ-S (Caesar's? or Tom C.'s?). Bruce sure does know
> > his equipment. I remembered the trick when I got the camera and have
> > had no dial problems.
> >
> > I checked the roll counter on my first roll of
When I break wind, smells like someone has died and people say " oh my GOD"
thus proving god isn't dead ;)
James
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 22:22:41 +, Nietzsche wrote:
>God is dead.
>
>
Pat,
Thanks! I appreciate your passing along some
operational points worth considering.
I'm sure the learning trauma will be lessened as a
result.
Jack
--- Pat White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In case my posts in the previous thread got lost,
> here they are again:
>
&
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 14:49:17 -0600, Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nick,
>
> Bruce showed us how rotate the dial with a pull at Grandfather
> Mountain this year.
> He had somebody's MZ-S (Caesar's? or Tom C.'s?). Bruce sure does know
> his equipm
201 - 300 of 4099 matches
Mail list logo
