I understand your logic completely.
- Lon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I recently purchased a ZX-7 from a local hometown camera shop. I paid about
$100 extra by buying local instead of mail-order. But my reasoning was this:
I wasn't sure which camera I wanted to buy, I was torn between the ZX-5
I agree with your assessment of BH. I've shopped there numerous times, and
have been treated very well. A lot of the countermen are real
enthusiasts and
enjoy talking to their customers. It's a great place. And you're right about
New Yorkers as well. They're not rude, they're just in a hurry. I
I have decided on the PZ-1P, and will probably sell my P5 body. That having been
said...I have one being held for me at a Cameras West (Ritz) store in Seattle, but I
can save about $100 by ordering online or from one of the companies advertising in
PETERSEN'S. They all range in price from
On Sat, 29 Dec 2001 19:04:27 +0800, you wrote:
I have decided on the PZ-1P
Good mail-order stores: BH, Adorama, Camera World of Oregon,
Charlotte Camera, KEH. There are others, but those I listed will all
give good service and good prices for sure.
Avoid like the plague: anyone who demands
Stan,
I know that the stores in NYC can be quick in terms of answering
questions since they are pushing amounts of photographic equipment at low
prices. You are not really paying for service and they are usually very
crowded and busy. But ...
I do have to point out that I
On 29 Dec 2001 at 22:12, Matamoros, Cesar A. wrote:
I do have to point out that I recently wrote here about my recent
experience in BH (this month) and how I spent over 15 MINUTES each at both the
used department and new 35mm SLR departments. Yes I purchased used equipment,
but all the
Well, you've sold me on one...I've decided that, for my purposes, it would be an
excellent choice.
Jim
--
___
Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free!
http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143
-
This message is
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Pål Jensen
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 3:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
Kent wrote:
Actually failure in the marketplace is relative. Minolta can sell every
Maxxum 7 they can build. They just can't meet demand
-
From: James Moniz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 2:07 AM
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
Well, you've sold me on one...I've decided that, for my purposes, it would
be an excellent choice.
Jim
--
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Are you saying that stocks are selling out, or that cameras are not
reaching the stores?
aimcompute wrote:
I think we'll see the same kind of sales
pattern with the MZ-S. It's already been
reported as hard to find in stores by a
number of people on this list.
--
Shel Belinkoff
- Original Message -
From: aimcompute [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
To continue you this thread, I still don't think the PZ-1/1p's lack luster
sales had anything to do with the camera itself.
It had more to do with:
3. The pitiful lack of advertising done by Pentax
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
Are you saying that stocks are selling out, or that cameras are not
reaching the stores?
Surely the latter... As I wrote in another mail, I see this situation in
Warsaw...
Artur
-
This message
I've found that, locally, the cost and potential (very low) quantity sales of the MZ-S
keeps it from the store shelves. (I know because I asked.)
A self-fulfilling prophecy.
Salesmen need motivation. Stores need motivation.
That requires an investment. Maybe, someday, Pentax will realize
spiffs
I take it that a 'spiff' is some sort of perk? It's not in my sland
repertoire unfortunately...
Cheers,
Cotty
___
Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Check out the UK Macintosh ads
In a message dated 12/26/2001 11:05:15 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 12/26/2001 6:06:42 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And part because it looks like an ungainly brick.
Have you taken
Bruce wrote:
I suspect that the most that can be said is the PZ-1p was not as
successful as any of us would have liked. How successful the MZ-S
will be remains to be seen.
The MZ-S isn't designed to be sold in large volumes. Its a fine camera more in common
wit the LX and the MX.
John
John wrote:
And come on guys - is the MZ-S really all that well built?
Yes. The MZ-S is extremely well built. It will withstand impact far better than the
LX. In addition, it's a workhorse with durable metal parts. It also built with
precision and sports a highly precise film transport.
: Robert Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 9:04 PM
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 12/26/2001 6:06:42 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And part because it looks like an ungainly brick
What???
Pal wrote:
The MZ-S isn't designed to be sold in large volumes. Its a fine camera
more in common wit the LX and the MX.
OK. Tell me then... Pentax spends millions of dollars designing an
instrument and then doesn't hope to sell them in large volumes? We're not
talking about
Tom wrote:
OK. Tell me then... Pentax spends millions of dollars designing an
instrument and then doesn't hope to sell them in large volumes? We're not
talking about Ferraris and Lamborghinis here. We're talking about something
that a significant portion of the market could obtain.
The
PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
aimcompute wrote:
Oh shutup Pal,
Why should he shut up? He makes perfect sense on, this issue at least.
Not only many of us, but other camera reviewers don't agree with you.
These delusions tend to attract crowds
still can't get the hang of using a PZ-1p.
That wouldn't be a very nice thing to say, would it?
Tom C.
- Original Message -
From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 7:47 AM
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
Tom wrote:
Remember most
Tom wrote:
Do you realize your posts are full of back-handed insults?
No.
All function on the MZ-S is clearly market and totally intuitive for anyone
who can read.
Which is a fact. No person have so far claimed that he don't undersatnd where the
meter switch or drive mode switch is
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: aimcompute [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Päivä: 27. joulukuuta 2001 17:41
Aihe: Re: PZ-1p review
What???
Pal wrote:
The MZ-S isn't designed to be sold in large volumes. Its a fine camera
more in common wit the LX and the MX.
OK
Kent wrote:
Actually failure in the marketplace is relative. Minolta can sell every
Maxxum 7 they can build. They just can't meet demand and they are also still
on the losing side of the dollar equation when you factor in RD and
marketing costs.
Not according to the Finacial times. I
Oh :-).
Tom C.
- Original Message -
From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
Tom wrote:
Do you realize your posts are full of back-handed insults?
No.
All function on the MZ-S is clearly
Lately, PHOTOgraphic has been giving some belated credit to the PZ-1p. They
even listed it in the last issue as one of their five favorite cameras under
$500, which I found surprising.
I personally love the PZ-1p and can't really imagine a better all-around
camera. The ergonomics, as has
Rob.How recently did Pentax stop production of the PZ-1p??
I'm saving up for eithr the MZ5n or PZ-1p,and i see the 5n still for
sale in our big shops but have not realy noticed if the have any 1p's on the
shelf.
Thanks
Dave
Sadly, the PZ-1p wasn't even loved by Pentaxers in general - and
Sadly, the PZ-1p wasn't even loved by Pentaxers in general - and
certainly
not the way LX was. The demise of the LX was honored with a long
thread of
lavish toasts; the PZ-1p died without such honor. When I heard the
news
that the PZ-1p was officially out of production, I, however, silently
a couple years before they dry up.
Rob
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 10:53:56 -0500
From: David Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Re: PZ-1p review
Rob.How recently did Pentax stop production of the PZ-1p??
I'm saving up for eithr the MZ5n or PZ-1p,and i see the 5n still for
sale in our big shops
I just happen to have a PZ-1p for sale. It has the
Golden Section screen installed and the Grip Strap
attached. $300 plus shipping.
Doug
At 12:08 PM 12/26/01 -0500, you wrote:
I'm not sure of the exact date when production ceased.
Paal Jensen mentioned it a while back. It's hard to
find
be part marketing, part Nikon/Canon mentality
of the consumer-masses.
Tom C.
- Original Message -
From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 12:51 PM
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
Robert wrote:
I personally love the PZ-1p and can't really
At 16:04 26-12-2001 -0500, Tom C. wrote:
The fact it didn't do well may be part marketing, part Nikon/Canon mentality
of the consumer-masses.
I should say definitely some sort of marketing failure.
I have never, ever seen a (P)Z-1 or (P)Z1-p in the flesh and I've been in a
lot of camera shops
that of selling a Pentax.It seems like a deliberate
attempt on the salesperson's part not to sell the camera.
Tom C.
- Original Message -
From: wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 2:58 PM
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
At 16:04 26-12-2001
I should say definitely some sort of marketing failure.
I have never, ever seen a (P)Z-1 or (P)Z1-p in the flesh and I've been in a
lot of camera shops in my time!
IMO Pentax should gave away at least one Z-1/Z-1p to every local retailers
in the 1st place for promotional purpose. :)
regards,
-
From: wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 2:58 PM
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
At 16:04 26-12-2001 -0500, Tom C. wrote:
The fact it didn't do well may be part marketing, part Nikon/Canon
mentality
of the consumer-masses.
I should say definitely
wendy beard wrote:
At 16:04 26-12-2001 -0500, Tom C. wrote:
I have never, ever seen a (P)Z-1 or (P)Z1-p in the flesh and I've been
in a lot of camera shops in my time!
Lucky you, :)
Bob
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and
aimcompute wrote:
Oh shutup Pal,
Why should he shut up? He makes perfect sense on, this issue at least.
Not only many of us, but other camera reviewers don't agree with you.
These delusions tend to attract crowds. :)
I share Pal's views but shut up about the Z1/Z1-p a long time ago,
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001 10:04:53 -0500, you wrote:
When I heard the news
that the PZ-1p was officially out of production, I, however, silently drank
some homemade chianti.
... and I, completely sober and thoughtful, went out and bought a new
PZ1p (number three) to store away for the future.
John,
I like my PZ-1. I picked up a PZ-1p as some of the pdml members moved up to
the new MZ-S's and think it is an even better camera.
The PZ-1 has a totally different feel and operation from the Super Program
that I used extensively before it. The PZ-1p has a totally different feel
and
In a message dated 12/26/2001 6:06:42 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And part because it looks like an ungainly brick.
Bob
-
Have you taken the trouble to look closely at the competition?
Ed M
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001 20:51:48 +0100, you wrote:
Some of us actually celebrated the demise of the Z-1p
...and some of us regret replacing the top model PZ1p with the
mid-range MZ-S. In my opinion, history will judge the MZ-S as an
overpriced yuppie-pretending-to-be-artist's toy, much like the
Having been an owner of both PZ-1p's and MZ-S's I am struggling to see
why there is such strong words being thrown back and forth about these
two cameras. I feel that I have mastered both systems and think they
both do a great job as a photographic tool. If one only stops to
think about what is
John wrote:
...and some of us regret replacing the top model PZ1p with the
mid-range MZ-S. In my opinion, history will judge the MZ-S as an
overpriced yuppie-pretending-to-be-artist's toy, much like the Contax
G1 or N1.
I love this quote from a G1 reviewer, which in my mind also sums up
- Original Message -
From:
Subject: Re: I'm a nitwit! (was PZ-1p review)
I just love it when I spend two hours working out the tonality
of a print
only to realize later the whole thing is ruined because of
dust on the
negative or something.
You should take the time to learn
(But the MX must take second place to the LX.)
Bob
But both are lower than the 6x7 on the food chain.
HAR!!
William Robb
-
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
, Florida
last day in NYC
-Original Message-
From: David Brooks [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 10:54 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Re: PZ-1p review
Rob.How recently did Pentax stop production of the PZ-1p??
I'm saving up
, December 26, 2001 9:33 PM
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
But both are lower than the 6x7 on the food chain.
HAR!!
William Robb
-
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
Gary L. Murphy wrote:
I guess, like people, some objects are more photogenic than others, and the
(P)Z-1p is one example of this...
The Z-1p looks a lot better without that ugly 28-80 lens you see in most of the
pictures.
Cheers,
- Dave
David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec)
, 2001 8:09 PM
Subject: PZ-1p review
Just ran across this
http://www.photographic.com/showarchives.cgi?93:3
and found it very interesting. It reviews the PZ-1p, a camera I've heard
much about on the list, but never seen. Makes me a little envious,
actually. g
Dan Scott
[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Mon, 24 Dec 2001 10:54:49 -0700, aimcompute wrote:
I haven't held the MZ-S, but I have never held a camera that felt better in
the hand than a PZ-1p.
To use it is to love it.
Tom,
I could not agree more. When I first saw a picture of the PZ-1p I had the same first
impressions. Man, who
I could not agree more. When I first saw a picture of the PZ-1p I had the
same first impressions. Man, who
would ever be caught out with a camera that looked like that? After I went
to the camera store and saw it in
person and held it, it was love at first sight. I've never looked back
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 21:09:35 -0600, you wrote:
Just ran across this
http://www.photographic.com/showarchives.cgi?93:3
and found it very interesting. It reviews the PZ-1p, a camera I've heard
much about on the list, but never seen. Makes me a little envious,
actually. g
I think the PZ1p's
In a message dated 12/23/2001 7:51:07 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the PZ1p's downfall is simple. It is not a photogenic camera.
In actual use, it is beautiful, but catalog-size photos of it are
quite ugly. Who the heck would give a second look at an ugly
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PZ-1p review
I thought the Nikon F's were ugly.
They are, indeed:)) Especially F5, F4 and F3:))
Greetz
Artur
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow
- Original Message -
From: Artur Ledóchowski
Subject: Odp: PZ-1p review
I thought the Nikon F's were ugly.
They are, indeed:)) Especially F5, F4 and F3:))
Surely not the F3, with it's stylish red pinstriping!!!
L8R
Bill
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List
56 matches
Mail list logo
