From: rps@gnu.mat.uc.pt (Rui Pedro Mendes Salgueiro) Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc Subject: Pentax: Z20 + Z50 = Z70 ? NOT Date: 29 May 1995 13:20:18 +0200 Organization: Dep. de Matematica da Univ. de Coimbra Lines: 178 Message-ID: <3qcali$52o@gnu.mat.uc.pt> Reply-To: rps@mat.uc.pt NNTP-Posting-Host: gnu.mat.uc.pt X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] If you read Chasseur d'Images you should have recognised the title. Their point (or more exactly Pentax Marketing point) is that an entry-level reflex needs to have icons programs (action, landscape, portrait, macro) like the Z-20 and to be simple and have a low price like the Z-50p. So, Pentax made the Z-70 to compete with the Minolta 500si (400si in the USA ?) and the Canon EOS 500 (USA name ?). It can be more easily defined by the things it doesn't have: - metal lens mount. Like Canon and Minolta, Pentax has adopted a plastic lens mount for the low-end :( - in the Z-20 all (except the green) programs were shiftable. In the Z-70 only the normal program is shiftable. The icons ones are not. I think it was one of the best points in ergonomics. - the spot metering in manual mode has also disappeared. It is interesting reading how Pentax marketing rationalises this. - the power zoom modes have disappeared. I don't think this is important, since IMO they are just gadgets. The lens mount has still power contacts, so the power zoom can still be used (although the lens sold in kit with the Z-70 is the 35-80 F which doesn't have power zoom). - The panorama mode of the Z-50p has disappeared. Will anyone care ? [I have recently learned that in Japan there is a Z-70p. Panorama mode is a must in the Japanese market] Of course there were some evolutions. The AF system works in less light, and seems to be faster and quieter. The viewfinder is still very complete, although it doesn't seem to have the shift scale of the Z-20 and Z-50p. This is the scale in which appears the shift given to the program, either in the direction of frozen action/less depth-of-field or on the direction of the blurred action/more depth-of-field. Now there is only the scale for the exposure correction. [This is probably because the icons programs are not shiftable.] What is really bad about this camera is that it replaces the Z-20 and the Z50p. The Z-10 seems to still be produced [it is not], which I think is an overlap. And now Pentax doesn't has a medium-level camera. For instance when Chasseur d'Images tested the Minolta 600si, they presented as the Pentax competition the Z-1p. Of course the Z1-p is much more expensive, so it made Pentax look bad. Other magazine (Reponses Photo) made a comparative review of the 600si against the Z50p and others. In that case the Pentax was cheaper, but lacked a lot of features. So Pentax looked bad again. I think Pentax should make an intermediate camera between the Z-1p and the Z-70. [This happened but with very different ergonomics: the MZ-5] If I was defining it, I would add to the Z-20 a depth-of-field preview, an exposure lock button and a continuous focusing mode (and keep the metal lens mount!). Asking for a better AF system (horizontal detection, large sensor or multiple sensor) is probably asking too much. Khaled El-Sayed added: From: khaled@ncsu.edu (Khaled El-Sayed) Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc Subject: Re: Pentax: Z20 + Z50 = Z70 ? NOT Date: 1 Jun 95 00:29:37 GMT Organization: North Carolina State University Lines: 23 Message-ID: References: <3qcali$52o@gnu.mat.uc.pt> Reply-To: khaled@ncsu.edu NNTP-Posting-Host: odin.ece.ncsu.edu Originator: khaled@odin.ece.ncsu.edu Are you listening Pentax? The Z-20 user interface was a masterpiece. Now if the above features were included with Z-20 and I would add a MLU (even if not a real MLU as in the sense of the Elan), such a camera would be a real best seller. The lack of the above features was the reason why I got rid of my Pz-20 although I really liked every other bit if it. Khaled [rps: The Z-1p has a mirror prefire and a 2 second timer mode.] From rps Wed Mar 20 23:14:10 1996 Subject: Z-70 (was: Pentax MZ-5 : Is it good value at u600???) Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm References: <862_9603011150@miratel.uniserve.com> <4hvsck$kg7@metro.usyd.edu.au> <4i0ba1$d86@aggedor.rmit.EDU.AU> <4i5elh$4lj@hobyah.cc.uq.oz.au> <4iilk8$dcl@senior.nectec.or.th> Reply-To: rps@mat.uc.pt Distribution: Lines: 33 X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950824BETA PL0] Status: OR Ronachai Pratanaphon - SCMI - 3536472 (g3536472@mucc.mahidol.ac.th) wrote: > : Anyone have any opinions on the Pentax Z70? > Well forget this one and try Z-20 or Z-1p if you can or change to > other brand. However it up to you what you want it is much like ps camera > which can change lens. Although the Z-70 is a big step backwards compared with the Z-20 and I have criticised it a lot in the past (see above), it is not "much like [a] ps camera which can change lens". That description applies to cameras like the Minolta 300si, which only works in auto mode and doesn't even show which shutter speed and aperture it is using. The Z-70 has the following redeeming features: 1 - a complete viewfinder with speed and aperture 2 - exposure compensation (it can be used to overcome the lack of DX override if you want to push/pull film). 3 - shutter priority and aperture priority 4 - shiftable program 5 - manual mode 6 - good ergonomics If someone is limited to chose between the Z-70, the Minolta 300si (none of the above) or the EOS 5000 (only aperture priority and automatic modes), the Z-70 is clearly superior. -- http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/photos/ an ex-tiffoso until the end of 1997 .pt is Portugal| `Whom the gods love die young'-Menander (342-292 BC) Europe | Villeneuve 50-82, Toivonen 56-86, Senna 60-94