MZs or EOS3 ?

I have decided to upgrade from my trusty MX to an autofocus system.

I want a tough, relatively compact and light body with top quality lenses, probably a wide angle zoom, wide appature 50mm standard and a 70ish to 200ish zoom. I am a climber and often take photos in cold, wet and dusty places

This is going to cost me a fair amount and I only want to spend the money once

The Pentax MZs would seem to be well suited, with the added benefit of being able to use my MX as a backup body for the new lenses.

However some of the comments on www.potographyreview.com suggest that the MZs is not very well sealed and has a flimsy back over? The pentax 20mm, 20-35, 24-90 and 50mm lenses seem to be praised for optics and are compact and light, though mabe not as tough as the canon L lenses. But the range does not seem to include a good 70-200 zoom. Out of the independant manufactures only Sigma seem to support the PKAF mount, but their EX rage zooms are considerably heavier than the Canon 70-200 f4 L lens. Indeed the weight of the Sigma zoom would make the complete MZs kit HEAVIER than a Canon EOS 3 body with L quality lenses!

Also the Pentax kit seems a bit thin on the gound (any good dealers in the NW to look at the body and lenses?) Jessops webste doesn't seem to include the better lenses, but mifsuds mailorder website does.

Can anybody come up with good reasons to get the MZs system rather than an EOS3 system?

Thanks

Kevin

Tough one, I am fortunate to have both of the cameras you are looking at. The MZ-S is definetly the camera which I pick up and use most often, normally with a Sigma 28-300 or a Sigma 90mm EX. Autofocus is excellent and metering spot on. When combined with the FA 50mm F1.7 it is a great lightweight but tough camera which I use when out hill walking.

The EOS3 is also a great camera - but bigger! I normally use it tri-pod mounted with a Sigma 300mm F2.8 HSM. No doubting the quality of the Canon glass or the build quality. The near silent focusing is a great boon when photographing wildlife.

You really do need to hold both cameras to see which suits you best, however I think that they are both quality bits of kit and you will have a great time with either - let us know which way you leap.

Regards

I'm not sure you're right about Sigma being the only independent with PKAF mount lenses .
I have a Tamron 28-135mm lens which is my favourite "standard lens". I have a Tokina 18-35mm which is good and gives some wierd perspectives, and I have a Pentax 80-320mm which you said was not covered by decent Pentax optics. This lens has given some excellent results. The Pentax 50mm f1.4 PKAF is a superb lens, second to none.
There is a better choice of many things with the Canon, particularly, I think the flashes available for Canon are probably better, but I'm very happy with the choices of lens available for my Pentax MZ6 and *ist. I think the *ist is the equal of the MZS in many ways, but I don't know about the ruggedness. My cameras are not normally subjected to the physical extremes .
I'll be intereted to see which way you go.

I'm a great supporter of Pentax cameras and have used them since the Spotmatic. They are, for me, the ideal design, lightweight but reasonably rigged and with superb optics. The lenses are perhaps more durable than the camera bodies. Pentax have kept faith with the mount extremely well (as have Nikon) and I also loke the retention of the traditional aperture ring (as with Nikon), although the *ist cameras abandon this.

Pentax and Nikon aperture and focusing rings operate in the same direction so personally I wouldn't look at Pentax or Canon but rather Pentax or Nikon.

But whatever choice you do make, I am not sure that having two different systems is ergonomically sound. There is less potential confusion if you stick with one make.

I too think that many more manufacturers than Sigma support the Pentax mount.

I am keen to try the feel an MZs. AT the end of the day if it feels better than the EOS I am more likely to have it with me twhen that unique picture opportunity presents itself.

The problem is NO dealers in the NW seem to stock it anymore!
Does anyone know of a NW shop that has one?

MXs, 20-35 f4 and 50 f 1.7 is a lot of dosh to fork out mail order without seeing the goods first!

Take the point about independant lens makers, I was fooled by the fact that some of the big suppliers don't include PKAF fit indepentants in their ads. The Pentax tele zooms available at sensible prices do seem to be constructed to what folk call a "consumer" spec so if I go Pentax I may choose a Sigma EX 70-200 2.8

If you ask them to, Jessops will get one to any branch for your perusal.

If you want a really fantastic lens how about the Pentax 80-200mm f2.8? A monster of a professional lens, superb quality at a high price!

Otherwise, will someone like Park cameras send you an MZ-S on approval? You'll no doubt have to pay for it and a refund would presumably not include the shipping charge.

My thoughts:

1 Don't change brands without a very good reason. Your existing lenses will work on an MZ-S. They won't on a Canon.

2 No affordable autofocus camera will be more robust and less likely to fail than your MX. Do you really need autofocus?

3 When travelling on foot over difficult terrain, small, light cameras/lenses are preferable to bulky, heavy ones. Remember, too, that autofocus cameras use big, heavy, expensive batteries.

4 Don't buy a new film camera now, unless you are absolutely certain that you will use it and keep on using for all its useful life. It will be worth very little second-hand.

5 Digital cameras are as good as film (covers head and waits for the onslaught), cheaper to use, and much more versatile. However, they do require access to a computer to get the most out of them.

6 If you are going to the Himalayas, forget my remarks about digital. Take a film camera. I've bought film from a shop near the Tibetan border, but I didn't see any fancy batteries or memory cards on sale.

7 Sorry to say this, but in your position I'd stick with what you've got! Perhaps buy a spare body and treat yourself to a couple of really good lenses! The extra quality and speed of a good prime lens will do much more for your pictures than an autofocus camera.

8 If you wish to ignore 7, consider a Z1-P. They're in some respects better than an MZ-S, and can be bought for much less. Spend the money saved on lenses.

There, that should have confused you!

My Pentax MX is a very good camera which has served me well ( and will continue to) . I had to take it apart once to re route the corroded meter wiring after sea water got into it, I wouldn't fancy my chances doing that on an MZs.

However after having a GR1v compact for a while I have realised how many shots (particulary action) I am messing up or missing with manual exposure and manual focussing. The centre weighted metering on the MX is trusty but pretty limited compared to spot and matrix metering.

I will probably go the MZs route with a Pentax 20-35 zoom (not many good ultra wide lanses around s/h for Pentax mf) , 50mm 1.7 and maybe a Sigma EX tele zoom

STILL undecided

I realy like the idea of the Pentax but 2 main worries

relatively poor dust and moisture sealing on MZs and Pentax lenses compared to EOS3/L lenses?

Pentax UK does not seem to exist anymore, with dealers shipping in goods from Holland: does not give me much confidence in after sales backup if things go wrong.

I am considering spending a lot for what must be a long term investment so the above are very important, especially as I sometimes use my cameras in harsh evironments.

Just to let you know, I bought the MZS two weeks ago. I do a lot of outdoor travel/camping photo work. I am not the least bit worried about the MZS. I've been running it through the paces lately to see how she does. I had it out in a lovely Canadian snowstorm this weekend... no problems. I'm not worried about taking this on more trips and tossing it around. It'll hold up - I don't doubt it for a minute.

I'm still dragging this one out

More or less decided to go Pentax with a Pentax 20-35 f4 and 50 f 1.7 with a Sigma EX 70-200 f2.8

But it strikes me that an *ist with the above lenses would save me money and also weight when climbing.

On paper it seems to have similar functionality to the MZs (but not as tough)

Am I missing something?

I would keep my MX as backup, (but it let me down with mirror locking up at -20 C in January)

Kevin,
Perhaps you could contact Pentax or Canon for that matter and offer your services to 'field test' their products, that way you'd never have to buy any!

BTW, I think George's suggestion of a Z1-P would be an excellent and cheap way to get into 35mm AF and may very well provide you with everything you need (I love my Z1-P).

Hi,
IMHO the MZS is far far better than the *ist. It feels better, is much easier to use, more rugged and above all doesn't have the "crippled mount which means all your older lenses will work that much better. I wouls also prefer the MZS to the Z1P. More compact and much much less fiddly to use.
Kim

I'm selling an MZS and sigma 17-35 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See other thread for details.

Gordon

Kim C
Fiddly to use? The Z1-P? Are you one of those who still sets the aperture on the lens? Personally, I find the Z1-P easier to use than any camera I have ever owned, and that's a lot, going back to a folding Kodak in the fifties, and using all sorts of things since then.
The tragedy of the MZ-S was that they dropped the Z1-P user interface. Fortunatley, Pentax has seen the error of their ways and reintroduced a version of it on the *ist D.