Pentax MZ-S / Nikon F100 Opinions

[brofkand]

I know the F100 constantly gets good reviews (I've even read reviews that state it was Nikon's best 35mm SLR ever). But I am a Pentax DSLR user, and I'd love the interoperability of lenses. It's the funnest thing in the world to pick up old Sears, Vivitar, anonymous brand K mount lenses (or M42 for that matter) and slap them on my camera. I have a few MF Pentax SLRs (and a pretty bad AF model, the MZ-7), but I want a camera more like the F100; rugged, comfortable, large viewfinder, etc.

Having previously owned an F100, I can say I absolutely loved that camera. I was looking for an equivalent on the Pentax side, and it looks like the closest is the MZ-S. Does anyone have any experience with it?

If you have used it and the F100, how would you say they rank? Are there any other Pentax SLRs I should look at beside the MZ-S?

Thanks

 

[John Koehrer]

I don't know that Pentax ever made a camera comparable to the F100.

 

[brofkand]

In a few ways, the MZ-S is better than the F100. It has the ability to print exposure information on the film rebate, it can control wireless flashes using Pentax's wireless TTL system, it works with my K mount lenses, and I can use the stunning Pentax FA Limiteds (when I hit the lottery and can afford them).

The F100 allows full use of lenses without aperture rings (not that the Pentax doesn't, but you're limited to Program and Tv modes since you can't set the aperture in the body), it has a faster flash sync speed, it uses AA batteries, it is less expensive than the MZ-S, and I can get one of the wonderful DC lenses and a roll of Portra 160.

I am mostly looking for people that may have used both (or one or the other) and can offer experiences. It isn't worth it to me to sell my K-5 and switch to Nikon, so getting an F100 is unlikely.

I am toying with the idea of selling my K-5 kit and moving back to 100% film, though. I can't make up my mind on that one.

 

[pdjr1991]

I loved my f100 but recently upgraded to the f5 because its so darn cheap. Give the f5 a whirl!

 

[brofkand]

I loved my f100 but recently upgraded to the f5 because its so darn cheap. Give the f5 a whirl!

I'd love an F5. I see like new samples coming up on my local Craigslist, eBay, etc., for a fraction of what they went for even a few years ago. I'd love to have one, but they're too big and heavy for me. I'd really like a camera roughly the size of an F100, but with a K mount. And the MZ-S is the only comparable camera I've found.

 

[Jerry Thirsty]

I borrowed a friend's F100 once. My only impression was that it seemed quite large compared to the MZ-S. I think the friend was hoping I'd like the Nikon and make him an offer, but it just left me cold.

 

[Johnkpap]

The pentax ZX-5/MZ-5 is a very good camera, there is a Grip/ holder that takes AA batts and it workes wiith all K mount lenses
the camera that is slightly higher spec and is Quite rare, I have one my self it is the MZ-3/ZX-3 it has a 4000 shutter speed
plus a few other minor features, It also uses the same AA Batt grip.

The Nikon F100 is a good camera also, but the Manual lens metering ring (Made of plastic) has been known to crack. I stay
well clear of any of the CHEAP Plastic Nikon's, the F4, F5 F801 and F90 are the better AF NIKON'S.....this is my opinion only.

All my nikon cameras that I use are manual focus and are all well made, I do have a F801 that I never bother to use. All
my Pentax cameras are also manual focus, except for my MZ-3 that i bought new to enable me to use FA lenses.


I think that the Nikon F2 was the best ever Nikon and the Pentax LX was the Best Pentax.....

Johnkpap

 

[brian steinberger]

I have the F100 and love it. I also have an F4s and lugging that around for years didn't seem too bad until I got an F100. The F4 immediately got put away. I believe it when some say this is Nikon's best SLR taking affordability into mind. The only things missing from this being the best all around 35mm SLR are mirror lock up (which they did on purpose to keep sales of the F5 up), a standard cable release socket, I hate electronic cable releases! Who wants to carry around releases for all different cameras, make it standard! And a 100% viewfinder.

Anyway, I can't recommend the F100 enough, it's a great, smallish SLR with many great features. Autofocus is way faster than my antiquated F4. But if you already have a stash of Pentax glass stick with Pentax, only makes sense.

 

[Vonder]

I sold my MZ-S last year and haven't regretted it. The camera was fine, I just wasn't able to afford great Pentax glass, but the real reason was that the battery grip is rarer than hen's teeth. When they do show up for sale they sell for astronomical prices. Pentax made a size decision in going with the tiny batteries the camera uses and I never trusted them.

 

[Paul Howell]

I would get a F100 or F5 and a PZ1 or even a SF1n, both are dirt cheap. I have Pentex DSLR so I often carry a SF1n with it. I took an old Miranda split image focusing screen, but it down to fit the SF1 and shoot mostly M42s primes, auto focus is not affected. The SF1 has a AA grip as well.

 

[Pioneer]

PZ-1p

I have owned and used the F100 and I think the Pentax PZ-1p, or the PZ-1 is probably a closer match, at least in size. It is a very capable camera and I personally prefer it to the Nikon F100 but they are different cameras. The MZ-S is also one of Pentax's great cameras and came along a bit later than the PZ-1p. It is quite a bit smaller than the F100 and handles differently. If you liked the size of the F100 then the MZ-S will most likely feel small in your hands.

The PZ-1p and the F100 balance a bit better with longer telephotos. Being a smaller camera the MZ-S handles better with short telephotos and normal primes. I think that the MZ-S is actually a perfect match with the Pentax's Limited lenses.

In my opinion, if you enjoy using zoom lenses, or longer telephoto primes, the F100 or the PZ-1p are better suited for these types of lenses. If you like small primes and short telephoto lenses you will like using the MZ-S.

Just my 2 cents worth.

 

[brofkand]

I currently own a Pentax K-5 which is a fairly small DSLR, but it fits in my hand very well. The F100 was very substantial, and at times was a little too big.

The main reason I'm eyeing the MZ-S over the PZ-1p is it offers P-TTL wireless flash. I think it's the only film SLR to offer that. And I wouldn't care about that if I didn't already own 2 P-TTL compatible hotshoe flashes. Obviously they'll work with optical slave, but I'd rather do radio sync. It tends to be more reliable.

However, the PZ-1p is a fantastic camera. I've heard many good things about it. It's a lot cheaper than the MZ-S, and it has on-body aperture control (One of my lenses, the DFA 100mm WR Macro, is a beautiful lens that covers 35mm but doesn't have an aperture ring, so the MZ-S will only work in Tv and P modes with it).

 

[lxdude]

MZ-S or PZ-1p... sounds like you should get one of each!

 

[brofkand]

I may just go back to basics and get an MX or LX. I enjoyed photography much more before I went to digital, or even AF film SLRs.

 

[djacobox372]

I loved my f100 but recently upgraded to the f5 because its so darn cheap. Give the f5 a whirl!

How is a f5 an upgrade from a f100? I own both and consider the f5 the lesser camera--i jusr cant excuse the invisible af point selection and dumbell.like weight.

 

[filmamigo]

I've owned both of those cameras, as well as the Pentax PZ1p and the Nikon N90s.


The best camera of the four is the Nikon F100. No contest. Unfortunately it does not take Pentax K-mount lenses. That's a huge drawback for me, as I primarily shoot Pentax.


The Pentax PZ1p is directly comparable to the N90s. It's not comparable to the F100 or the MZ-S. The PZ1p and N90s are huge, ugly, plastic beasts that work very well. I actually give the edge to the PZ1p over the N90s, because Pentax adopted dual control wheels and the N90s is crippled with only one. But AF is crude on both cameras and you definitely feel like you are shooting a product designed in a previous generation.


The MZ-S is the closest that Pentax ever got to something like the F100. Had Pentax released the prototype MZ-1, I suspect it would have been the equal to the F100. But the MZ-S is something completely different than the F100.


First, the MZ-S is light. It feels like half the camera of the F100. But build quality is similar -- true metal alloy body, combined with a plastic film door (to the dismay of both cameras' owners.) Autofocus performance goes to the F100, which is screaming fast and also supports newer protocols like AF-S and VR lenses. The MZ-S autofocus is perfectly satisfactory, especially in good light. But it's not up to the Nikon standard. (Pentax lost ground here from the PZ1p, which held its own against the N90s.) For flash usage, both are very good -- though Nikon's flashes themselves are generally superior to Pentax. The MZ-S will use the latest flash technology (P-TTL) and was introduced alongside the still-current AF360FG flash. For the F100, you will want to use a last-generation flash like the SB26 or SB28 (i.e. regular TTL.) The battery situation for the MZ-S is tricky. I prefer the MZ-S without the grip, but then you have to use expensive little lithium cells. With the grip, you can use AA batteries. I think Nikon had it right using AAs in the plain F100.

While in general I think the F100 has the edge, you come back to lenses. I love Pentax lenses, and even the famed Limited lenses are a bargain. The best, most modern camera to use Pentax lenses is the MZ-S. The combination of an MZ-S and Limited lenses is unlike anything else in the camera world -- small, light, sturdy, reasonably high performance. It's kind of like comparing a Mazda Miata to a Corvette. The Miata will never be as quick as the Corvette, or feel as substantial. But it will deliver a special experience that might be worth forgoing brute strength and speed.