Mike wrote:
As the one who pointed the spacing issue out first, I feel obliged to
note that it was a pre-production model and I was assured that the
software glitch was rectified before production commenced. Anyone who
had the problem with a model sold to them needs to consult their
Joshua wrote:
The conversion from the LX to the MZS should be no problem as you demonstrate and
testify. If you look at the two cameras they are laid out in the same fashion: shutter
wheel in the same spot on both bodies; compensation dial in the same spot; aperture
still controlled the
- Original Message -
From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I suspect, but could be wrong of course, that the MZ-S is the last gift to
people using older K-mount gear in conjunction with newer AF gear. With the
MZ-5/n/3 they gave us the cheap alternative. With the MZ-S they gaves us the
well
. kesäkuuta 2003 2:08
Aihe: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
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
]
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Päivä: 23. kesäkuuta 2003 2:07
Aihe: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
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
It's survived two falls in the space of six months without skipping a beat
-
that's build quality.
I remember someone here mentioned a MZ-? was dropped from the roof and it
survived. It isn't no MZ-S. That's quality.
It does everything it should every time - that's build quality.
There were
you a better
photographer, only your eye and talent will do that.
Rant over, I feel better now...
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
- Original Message -
From: Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 5:23 PM
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
It's
Looks to me like the Canadian agent wants to earn more from reselling an
MZ-S than Pentax Corp earns by building them. Politely put it's the tail
wagging the dog. Bluntly put, the agent is being a greedy parasite. It's
the same everywhere, unfortunately :-(
- Original Message -
From:
Alan, I'm afraid your last remark betrays exactly how much you know about
the MZ-S.
I have never said I know the MZ-S. I simply raise some questions.
I won't even bother to comment upon your second-hand and negative
points,
Why not? Is that question not fair?
By all means carry on comparing spec
if you believe that these are reasonable substitutes, i have a Minolta Himatic that
should fall into these categories too.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: Raimo Korhonen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 03:23
Subject: Vs: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
FUBAR'ed was the grid screen when I scrapped it while putting it in. I'm not
directing my comments to anyone in particular BTW.
Feroze
- Original Message -
From: Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 10:17 AM
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
I
Rob wrote:
It's rock solid, I haven't subjected it to a good soaking yet but it's still a
baby.
REPLY:
It is the most brick-like of any Pentax 35mm camera. According to the engineers it has
the most rigid body of all Pentaxes ever.
Pål
on 23.06.03 16:29, tom at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had 2 of them for about a year, they didn't break. I think it's a
solid camera except for the back.
Back is not that bad, although plastic. Actually ou will find plastic back
on Nikon F100 too. Real problem could be latch pin - it is only one
i can. a person who wants a Leica doesn't want anything remotely less in cost. that is
what cachet does. cost is in of itself a feature.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Anthony Farr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 09:26
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens
Well, if you're compiling a list of cameras that aren't Leicas, then I
suppose only one camera marque is disqualified from inclusion.
I believe Raimo was listing a few cameras that fulfil the same function as a
Leica. But I wasn't aware that actually BEING a Leica was a requisite.
regards,
://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: Anthony Farr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Päivä: 23. kesäkuuta 2003 18:35
Aihe: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
Well, if you're compiling a list of cameras that aren't Leicas, then I
: Raimo Korhonen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 24 June 2003 3:42 AM
Subject: Vs: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
Actually there was the assertion that the other current rangefinders have
prices close to Leica´s. That is not the case, Leica is the most expensive
by a wide
Hi,
Monday, June 23, 2003, 5:09:07 PM, you wrote:
i can. a person who wants a Leica doesn't want anything remotely less in cost.
I have 2 Leica Ms. I'd like another, and I'd have been very happy indeed if
they cost a lot less money.
that is what cachet does. cost is in of itself a feature.
are they still using them as their primary camera?
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Bob Walkden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 14:15
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
that must be why the world's great photojournalists have
incidentally, that is a fine description of cachet. you use X because famous Y uses X.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Bob Walkden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 14:15
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
that must be why
, 2003 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
The Leica says Leica on the front. The Leica uses Zeiss lenses. When you
understand what these two things mean the comparison is over.
Less than there used to be, and now mostly in documentary photography. It also tends
to be older photographers who have been using them a very long time. When you've used
a camera so long that you don't have to think about working the controls and it's
quiet and descrete, it becomees the
You are probably aware that after you stated that Leica cameras use
Zeiss lenses, your credibility level in what concerns Leica is 0.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Less than there used to be, and now mostly in documentary photography. It also tends to be older photographers who have been using them a
/~raikorho
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: Anthony Farr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Päivä: 23. kesäkuuta 2003 19:07
Aihe: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
Oh, I see now.
Other rangefinders are just as expensive as Leicas, unless someone actually
Hi,
Monday, June 23, 2003, 7:44:26 PM, you wrote:
are they still using them as their primary camera?
yes, a great many of them are. Tom Stoddart does, so do people like Dario
Mitidieri, Claus Bjorn Larsen, Kai Wiedenhofer, Joachim Ladefoged - all
fairly young, all recent winners of World Press
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
them, grow to love them.. Those who don't appreciate them go buy a fully
loaded
clone or a fully loaded sport-ute or a Canon with 45 eye-focus points and
then
they go out and take blurry handheld
Artur Ledóchowski wrote:
What the hell?! All I said was the MZ-S is overpriced!
Nothing more!
Artur,
I agree.
Pentax UK appear to agree with you too; the best street
price
of the MZ-S is now almost exactly half the Pentax UK list
price.
It was overpriced at GBP 1099.99, but I will probably
On 23 Jun 2003 at 5:41, Steve Larson wrote:
The 50/1 designation just looks so weird when you are used to seeing
50/1.2, 50/1.4 etc. Awesome glass! OK, I admit it, I`m a Leica wannabe.
BTW, are you going Canon?
Only time will tell, I'll be a little more decisive at the end of August I
guess.
- Original Message -
From: Artur Ledóchowski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Actually if a photographer is unable to take sharp pics, no brand name
will
help him - be it Canon or Pentax. 45-points AF is built into the top class
bodies only. Mid class stuff has up to 7 points (EOS 30/33/Elan 7/7e),
On 23 Jun 2003 at 18:13, Herb Chong wrote:
what were the total unit sales of the M bodies at the time? there are several
instances of retailing products where raising the price increased sales. to
charge this much, they must have something. that's cachet, invented or real.
Honda discovered
Hi, Herb,
My info was slightly inaccurate, as it appears that about 65,000 Leica badged CL's
were produced, with a few more Minolta or Leica/Minolta badged CL's produced for the
Japanese market. That figure (65,000) is about twice as many as the M series produced
during the time the CL was
Back is not that bad, although plastic. Actually ou will find plastic back
on Nikon F100 too. Real problem could be latch pin - it is only one and
could eventually break badly treated - in F100 there are two of them for
security.
Seems to be a common problem for most plastic backs, including the
I looked at some old Leicas because I love cameras, and Leicas are so
much a part of the history of photography. I bought one because I fell
in love with the beautiful metalwork, the solid feel of the mechanics,
and the whisper of the shutter.
Paul
I wasn't comparing M bodies with the CL. I was merely pointing out that some Leica
owners (as if we're all the same!) aren't buying a Leica because it's more
expensive.
I was trying to refute Herb's position, and here's his quote: a person who wants a
Leica doesn't want anything remotely less
on 6/23/03 9:29 AM, tom at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Lon Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mebbe what we ought to do is place an MZ-S in TV's hands for
6 months (if he doesn't have one) and get a report back.
That would settle build quality and
frank theriault wrote:
I was planning on selling my CL, which had been in the shop for almost
6 months. I got it back (finally had the $$ for the bill) almost two
weeks ago. I got back my first roll last week. The sharpness and
beautiful contrast of that little lens is palpable. That
Exactly Joshua...
Vic
In a message dated 6/23/03 4:17:17 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The conversion from the LX to the MZS should be no problem as you
demonstrate and testify. If you look at the two cameras they are laid
out in the same fashion: shutter wheel in the same spot on both
Of course, the M5 is a rather weird camera. It was not very popular.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 9:06 PM
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
I
- Original Message -
From: Anthony Farr
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
Oh, I see now.
Other rangefinders are just as expensive as Leicas, unless someone
actually
proves that they're not. In which case Leicas are so much more
expensive because they have 'cachet
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
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
- 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
so I very often play
- 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 quality but rather have many
: 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
prices. In this case such comparision is clearly
] [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 put through the Dynax and how many through
MZ-S?
None.
But I have
Yeah - but the current electronic shutters are incredibly durable. Perhaps it is in
order to quote the Chasseur d´Images August/September 2000 test again:
Canon EOS 300 - 180186 cycles
Minolta 404 si - 249185 cycles
Nikon F 60 - 64633 cycles
Pentax MZ-30 - 145305 cycles
And in the Nikon it was
- 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 to buy such a
camera
Quality costs. The MZ-S is probably the most durable camera you can buy
under $1500. Features, especially electronic features, cost almost nothing.
Though it is my experience that 90% of the people can not tell the
difference. The other 10% will appreciate the MZ-S very much.
Quality does cost
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
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
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 $800 street price.
_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus
Hi Lon,
Well worth the price (which was U$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
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 for a $500 street price Pentax body
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 iiig
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 Mount Progress
Herb Chong wrote
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
- Original Message -
From: Caveman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2003 22:04
Subject: Leica Gucci (Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress)
There was a nice test some years ago about that. A sample of women was
asked to shop from a room with clothing
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 also a wonderful machine. If one tales
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
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 rights
]
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.
Herb Chong wrote:
is a $500 Gucci bag better than a knockoff at $100? yes. i can tell the difference too. is it worth five times as much? that is a different question. is a Leica close to 10 times better than my ZX-5n? definitely not. is it even twice as good? that is a much harder question to
On 22 Jun 2003 at 22:43, Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
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
On 22 Jun 2003 at 22:43, Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
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
Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 2:30 AM
Subject: Re: Vs: Vs: Lens Mount Progress
I am one of those who feel that build quality is worth paying
for, and may therefore purchase the MZ-S sometime in the next
year or so. It is a bit over-spec'd for my
On 23 Jun 2003 at 13:12, jcoyle wrote:
It's survived two falls in the space of six months without skipping a beat -
that's build quality. It does everything it should every time - that's build
quality. It's completely consistent from frame to frame - that's build quality.
It doesn't have
68 matches
Mail list logo
