Which one should I buy?

Stevopedia · 07-30-2008, 06:34 PM

So I've decided to start with a "two-body" system for my film bodies: one manual mechanical camera and one late '80s or '90s electronic, computerized Wunderkamera. I'm dead set on the KX as the manual, but the automatic is still up in the air.

Which leads to my question. Should I buy the SF-1n, PZ-1, or PZ-1P? Or is there another automatic electronic Pentax body that you think I should consider?

*gokenin* · 07-30-2008, 06:49 PM

I have the pz-1p it is a very good camera bought it as my first film slr. there is currently one for sale in the forum for 85 shipped I believe

*felix68* · 07-30-2008, 07:33 PM

PZ-1p for sure. I personally think that the focusing is better than my K100D as long as there is something with vertical contrast. I have considered buying the one in the marketplace but mine is in perfect working order and I have a ME Super as a backup. It really is a solid body and you can't beat the FPS, the fastest Pentax to date, including digital. Mine actually clocks about 4.5 FPS in testing.

Stevopedia · 07-30-2008, 08:38 PM

Originally Posted by felix68

PZ-1p for sure. I personally think that the focusing is better than my K100D as long as there is something with vertical contrast. I have considered buying the one in the marketplace but mine is in perfect working order and I have a ME Super as a backup. It really is a solid body and you can't beat the FPS, the fastest Pentax to date, including digital. Mine actually clocks about 4.5 FPS in testing.

Wow, that's actually pretty impressive that the PZ-1P is so much better than the current digital. Why can't Pentax make 'em like they used to?

I might mention that my dad has an SF1n, and I've used it some, and I really like it, which is why I've included it here.

I will, of course, be keeping my K1000. I'd be silly not to!

*séamuis* · 07-31-2008, 05:15 AM

Pz-1p, without a doubt. that thing is a gem.

skid2964 · 07-31-2008, 05:37 AM

I agree with the PZ1, that would be my choice.

But you can find ZX-L's pretty cheap these days.
They are very nice cameras also.

kjao · 07-31-2008, 05:48 AM

I believe there is one Pz-1p for sale in the Marketplace at the moment.

*Buffy* · 07-31-2008, 07:39 AM

I vote for the MZ-S, although it will cost a lot more than the PZ-1. I just love my MZ-S with the BG-10 grip!

zx-m · 07-31-2008, 07:59 AM

I tend to favor cameras that have an optional grip (winder, motor, or battery pack). Over the years, I have noticed an improvement in balance and handling, and I prefer running on AA batteries (as is the case with the ZX series). The PZ line does not offer a grip or battery pack. The SF line does--however, they are very hard to find. Thus, I would go with a ZX-M, ZX-5n, or an ME Super.

*Canada_Rockies* · 07-31-2008, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by Stevopedia

So I've decided to start with a "two-body" system for my film bodies: one manual mechanical camera and one late '80s or '90s electronic, computerized Wunderkamera. I'm dead set on the KX as the manual, but the automatic is still up in the air.

Which leads to my question. Should I buy the SF-1n, PZ-1, or PZ-1P? Or is there another automatic electronic Pentax body that you think I should consider?

The PZ-1p failed a Pop Photo "test" some years ago because it consistently underexposed 1/2 stop. They tested the metering of a whole range of cameras and (no surprise here) picked the Canon as the best exposure because it was more often within 1/4 stop. This is quite the stupidest result that I have ever seen, as, except for one lighting situation that all the cameras had trouble with, the PZ-1p exposure was identical for all the frames. The Canon would overexpose one frame and underexpose the next situation. If the alleged "tester" had dialed in +1/2 the metering would have been within 1/8 stop all across the board with the PZ-1p.

Hence, I would grab the PZ-1p. My SF-1 meters quite well, but does not match that result. As you may notice below, I also own an MZ-S. It is a very fine camera, and I love it as well, but the metering does not hold up to the PZ-1p. I do have to add/subtract a bit depending on the scene.

woof · 07-31-2008, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by Canada_Rockies

If the alleged "tester" had dialed in +1/2 the metering would have been within 1/8 stop all across the board with the PZ-1p.

Is the metering system the same for the PZ-1? I have one and it's normally pretty spot on. I would not be adverse to trying a roll at +.5 on your recommendation Albert ...

woof!

fwbigd · 07-31-2008, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by Canada_Rockies

The PZ-1p failed a Pop Photo "test" some years ago because it consistently underexposed 1/2 stop. They tested the metering of a whole range of cameras and (no surprise here) picked the Canon as the best exposure because it was more often within 1/4 stop. This is quite the stupidest result that I have ever seen, as, except for one lighting situation that all the cameras had trouble with, the PZ-1p exposure was identical for all the frames. The Canon would overexpose one frame and underexpose the next situation. If the alleged "tester" had dialed in +1/2 the metering would have been within 1/8 stop all across the board with the PZ-1p.

Hence, I would grab the PZ-1p. My SF-1 meters quite well, but does not match that result. As you may notice below, I also own an MZ-S. It is a very fine camera, and I love it as well, but the metering does not hold up to the PZ-1p. I do have to add/subtract a bit depending on the scene.

I agree with you 100%. If Pentax had made a DSLR to equal the PZ-1p I would still be shooting Pentax. I traded my Canon E0S 5 for a PZ-1 and then purchased a PZ-1p. Best film camera Pentax ever made in my opinion.

VR
Darryl

ftpaddict · 07-31-2008, 12:31 PM

PZ-1P is the most popular choice, and I'll go with it too.

*Canada_Rockies* · 07-31-2008, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by woof

Is the metering system the same for the PZ-1? I have one and it's normally pretty spot on. I would not be adverse to trying a roll at +.5 on your recommendation Albert ...

woof!

The testers probably picked up on Pentax's usual slight underexposure setting. I wouldn't bother with the +0.5 unless I were disappointed with the results. What I was complaining about was the testing bias towards a camera that did not consistently meter at the same point because it averaged out to correct. That reminds me of the old statistician joke - a statistician with one foot in a bucket of ice water and the other in a bucket of boiling water would, on average, be comfortable.

*felix68* · 08-03-2008, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by Canada_Rockies

The testers probably picked up on Pentax's usual slight underexposure setting. I wouldn't bother with the +0.5 unless I were disappointed with the results. What I was complaining about was the testing bias towards a camera that did not consistently meter at the same point because it averaged out to correct. That reminds me of the old statistician joke - a statistician with one foot in a bucket of ice water and the other in a bucket of boiling water would, on average, be comfortable.

Yeah, I would say that those test results are laughable. I have been very happy with the metering on my PZ-1P. Even with flash, it seems to be spot on every time.