----- Original Message -----
From: "Jaume Lahuerta"
Subject: RE: MZ-S Odditties
> It is so bad because a 4-times-cheaper Olympus P&S was
> able to focus without any flash aid in the same
> situation, and because people thought that the picture
> was actually made (and thus they moved) when it was
> only the focusing stage. (Imagine trying to make
> 'candids'...).
I presume you would rather Pentax went with passive autofocus?
You realize that your AF range would then be about 20 feet,
after which you would not have autofocus at all. I don't mean to
belittle your concern, but lets be careful about what we make
comparisons to.
>
> Imagine also when red eyes mode is on, the series of
> flash fires (strobe) are made twice... it is like a
> disco. :-)
I do laugh at all these Rube Goldberg contraptions designed to
overcome basic technology flaws. It's not just Pentax, all the
camera makers do it. It makes me like my manual cameras even
more....
>
> The problem is that the situation was not low light
> enough to justify the need of this focus aid. It is a
> question of threshold.
Did you actually meter the light to get an EV reading that you
could compare back to the camera specifications? If not, how do
you know?
William Robb
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
