don_laing1

<p>I bought two second hand *ist 35mm cameras because of their feature set and small size. As mentioned in a post earlier in this thread the *ist had most of the features of the MZS, while its autofocus and metering were more advanced than those of the MZS. I too, bought and often used the (quite cheap) battery grip.<br>

My main criticism of the *ist is its lightweight plastic construction. Both of mine packed up within 6 months of use. The first with a major fault of the main circuit board (uneconomic to repair), the second due to jamming of the selector wheel on the top plate. The technician who opened the first body was surprised by the overall thin plastic construction. I decided the cost of having the second body opened up was also uneconomic.<br>

My urge to occasionally use film is met by an MZS and battery grip plus a bevy of F and FA lenses - as a change from my K20 (and K10 as back-up body). The MZS suits my hand much better than those fat K20/10 bodies. Its a lovely piece of equipment.</p>

<p>Hello there, be aware that the 17-70 is an SDM lens (has its own internal motor). It is a bit risky buying an SDM as there are many failures reported of the SDM mechanism on dpreview. My own wouldn't achieve focus after 2 months use and went to Japan twice. It's still faulty...so you will be taking a chance in buying one. If you get a good one, then it covers a really useful range and generally gives good image quality. I ended up buying the Sigma 17-70 as a substitute. Meanwhile the Pentax lens sits on a shelf - because it is really only usable as a manual focus lens.</p>

<p>Hi Peter, You have the choice of using the in-body SR or switching that off and switching on the Sigma lens SR. My finding with the OS 50-200 was that the in-lens was only slightly better than the Pentax sensor SR.<br>

My experience was supported by a review of the Sigma lens where they found it only gave about 2 1/2 stops of reliable improvement. I generally find the Pentax sensor SR gives me about 2 stops improvement for tele lens shots.<br>

Despite that I find the new Sigma 50-200 a great improvement over the little Pentax 50-200. It is larger and heavier than the Pentax DA for sure, but the trade-off is that make it easier to hold steady (more inertia). It also seems to have better image quality than what I got with the DA. The HSM motor is much quieter than using a screw-drive lens such as the DA.</p>

 

<p>I bought the screw drive version after my Pentax 17-70 suffered the familiar SDM failure. The Sigma is wonderfully sharp at close focus and generally better at the 70 end than the 17 end. My frustration with it is that mine back-focuses at 70mm and front-focuses at 17mm. So even with my K20D, using the autofocus adjustment is not a practical solution. That's a pity as otherwise the lens performs very well. The lens is also solid and well constructed.<br>

I'm interested in the new 17-70 OS/HSM version as my 50-200 OS/HSM has only very minor BF/FF issues, which may mean Sigma are paying more attention to the autofocus issue in their newer lenses. That extra half stop of speed at 70mm would be welcome too.</p>

<p>I'd like to add my experiences with the *ist. It definitely did have high specs -doing (almost?) everything the MZS did as well as having the modernised metering and AF systems. It was however a very lightweight plastic body which was not built to last -in contrast to the MZS. I bought two *ist bodies second hand. The first developed a major electronic failure after 6 months use and as the repair (new main electronic board) cost twice as much as I had paid for the body I declined to have it fixed.<br />The second worked well for 6 months then the small wheel that sets the shutter speed while on the Auto setting jammed. The technician who looked it over advised against fixing it as he said so much of the body and controls were made of very lightweight materials.<br />This is a great pity as the camera is small enough to fit into a large coat pocket when paired with the 50mm 1.7 lens I was using on it. Excellent for out and about informal street work.<br>

P.S. I have the MZS and don't doubt it will be working well in another 20 years......</p>

 

<p>Hi Matt,<br>

I have the 28mm 2.8 F lens, which I think was the first autofocus 28 by Pentax. Its main virtues are that it is light and compact. The 28mm focal length is suitable for around town/street photography and the compact size does not draw undue attention. Image-wise, it is an average performer, but lacking the digital coatings, it is sometimes prone to flare and lack of contrast. I don't have the 3.5 to compare it with. Under the right lighting conditions you should be able to make an A3+ size print using this lens.<br>

Don.</p>