Ok.. Let's see if I can clarify a statement that I made earlier: The MZ-S is a failure
I believe that's how I put it. Now, why do I feel this way? 1) Price - like all PDMLers, I whine about the cost of things - especially things that I can get for about half the cost of the MZ-S - The Elan 7 is not a flagship model - it's about 3 or 4 down from Canon's "top O' the line" EOS-1v - spec'd out it misses on a couple points but is half the price of the MZ-S 2) Availability of Accessories - I do recall, as many of you may or may not, Mr Brad Dobo (may he R.I.P.) complaining about having to traverse much of this province in search of at least one accessory (those of you who have the digest version and are intense enough to search for it can remind me which one it was) because Pentax Canada didn't have any in stock and the slow boat from Japan was taking far too long - Most major companies, if they are truly trying to get the pro market share, would, I believe, bend over backwards for their "pro" shooters. Pentax on the other hand shrug and offer you a nice P&S camera instead. 3) Specs - for about $80 more (according to the B&H) you can have an EOS 3 ($880) over the MZ-S ($799) - Viewfinder: for the EOS 3 - 97% coverage; Viewfinder for the MZ-S - 92% coverage. Both offer interchangeable screens Metering: for the EOS 3 - Evaluative metering (linkable to any point), Partial metering (approx. 8.5% of viewfinder at center), Center spot metering (approx. 2.4% of viewfinder at center), Spot metering (linked to focusing point at approx. 2.4% of viewfinder), Multi-spot metering (Max. 8 multi-spot metering entries), Center-weighted averaging metering - Range 0-20EV for the MZ-S - 6-Zone evaluative, Centerweighted, Spot - Range 0-21EV Focusing System: for the EOS 3 - 0-18EV range, up to 45 AF points (that's excessive in my books.. but hey.. some people want that), and eye controlled focus for the MZ-S - 1-18EV range, 6 AF points in a cross hair pattern Shutter Speed: for the EOS 3 - 30 - 1/8000 - syncs at 1/200 for the MZ-S - 30 - 1/6000 - syncs at 1/180 I'm going to stop listing spec's there - we all can look them up and quote them ad nauseum (which I'm sure you're getting already) but I think you see that the EOS 3 is only $80 more than the MZ-S and you're getting a bit more bang for your buck on the body. 4) Lenses - this really isn't a knock since you all know how good the Pentax glass is. This I admit to; however it's the old glass that I believe is worthy and the new stuff just hasn't been developed to be "pro" grade. At the same point in time the Canon and Nikon "pro" glass can be expensive but then it offers more "options" a la USM and IS. A good example: Canon 28-70 f2.8 L (USM) - $1029.00 USA or $999.95 Import Pentax 28-70 f2.8 SMC-FA - $999.95 So.. is the MZ-S a failure? As a flagship model; I'd say that it is. As a 3rd tier semi-pro/advanced amateur model - it's ok. If I had the $$$ now to choose and, had no apparent brand loyalty (and the Toronto PDML folk know that I don't) - I would do my research and probably go with the Canon EOS 3 for the extra $80 US. I never even included Nikon's F100 which would probably have been similar to the EOS 3 - but I figure Bruce Rubenstein or another Nikon shooter could probably chime in with their opinion on that one. I have no quarrel with those that chose the MZ-S. If you've got it going on with the camera and you dig it; more power to you. What I have a problem with is Pentax making a "flagship" model that is only 3rd tier of what other "competing" companies are making. As I stated before, this is why I feel that Pentax is happy with their current share of the 35mm market - They have stated that this year would be different; so far, it has been - let's hope that it continues and Pentax will prove me, and all the others out there hoping for something special, wrong. Cheers, Dave -----Original Message----- From: Keith Whaley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 7:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax needs USM and IS Kenneth Waller wrote: > > Huh? > Kenneth Waller > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Chang-Sang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 7:57 PM > Subject: RE: Pentax needs USM and IS > > > Pentax's current "flagship" - MZ-S - is, even by those on this list, > > considered a failure. I've not yet seen a proper definition of why/how it's a failure, so until I do, it seems pretty good on the specifications page... Right now I don't buy that... > > Pentax's last decent model was the MZ-5n IMHO. Aka ZX-5N in the U.S. of A. A well-respected camera, by all accounts... keith whaley
