Hi, Fred wrote:
> > Possibly, I think the manual recommends ISO 400. > > Yeah, I think that the lens is so slow (at any FL) that 400 ASA > makes sense, and that ~is~ what the manual recommends. This is no > problem for me, since I've been using mostly 400 print film since > the early 1980's, when the stuff was crap. No so slow, for a compact. f3.5 @ 38mm, reducing to f7.5 @ 90mm. Compare this to the Espio 140 which reduces to 10.something @ 140mm. Pretty near unuseable, except with flash on closeups. I tend to use mostly the wide end, so wanted to use medium (~100) ASA slide film. > As for the IQZ 90 WR, ......... It's rugged and waterproof > (mine's been baptized in heavy rain and in heavy salt spray), > although a bit ugly - <g>. I got mine for similar reasons. I do a lot of "field" work (not always rural - I had some interesting experiences in West Yorkshire recently) which needs record shots and it is often muddy or raining. Originally I bought a Canon A1 waterproof for this work but it produced impressionist daubs at best. The Pentax is an order of magnitude better but has the disadvantage of not total waterproofing and the zoom lens. I got it for less than the Canon, in unused (didn't stay like that for long) condition. mike - 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 .
