Actually, I just popped into my local camera pusher's shop and demanded to borrow and *ist with an FA-J lens. I played around with it for a while before returning it, and my observations were generally positive. For an entry-level camera, it seems quite good: packed with features (which I found fairly intuitive to use without reading the manual) and reasonably robust. Sure, it is not MZ-S (and definitely no F5) robustness-wise, but it seems better build than the F-entry-level counterparts. It took getting used to to set apeture and shutter speed with the (thumb-?)wheel, and I think that the big LCD on the back is superflorus and just adds to the things that can possibly break (a smaller display positioned in a less scratch-prone place would be better). But, as I said, overall a more than decent camera.
Give me a digital version of that, priced as an entry-level, and I'll be happy. I am not ready to shell out for a "flagship" digital anyways (my use doesn't by far justify it, and I do not plan on exchanging my MZ-S), but I would like to use my Pentax lenses on a digital body. Of course, my oldest pentax lens is the 24-90 and the 3 limited, so I don't worry too much for backwards compatibility. The camera pusher told me, that in his shop, the *ist's were flying off the shelves, so it seems that the *ist could be a winner. I surely was impressed, and may even get one just because... --thomas On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 15:06:48 +0300 Alin Flaider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yeah, there's not much disagreement over here about *ist being > entry level, as it is about digital ist falling into this area. > Not judging Pentax future by the *ist D specifications is too > much to ask from most of us, common mortals with normally sized > pockets. At this price tag we expect more common sense in the > package. However, even if Pentax plans do *not* include full > mount compatibility and aperture ring operation on higher bodies, > they should state so after all this whining here and particularly > in Japan. They owe that much to their traditional customers. Not > doing that so far only points to their deceptive intentions. > > Bah, I'm too disgusted to speak of this anymore. I think I'll > stick with the off-topic threads for this summer. :o< > > Servus, Alin > > Roland wrote: > > RM> To those who complains about cheap build quality etc. - the > RM> *ist is entry level. Not pro-level nor mid-market. It's not > RM> more plastic, not more cheaply built, than Nikon F/N 75, > RM> Minolta Dynax/Maxxum 5 or Canon EOS 300 V. > > RM> And to those who judge Pentax future cameras and lenses by the > RM> entry level *ist and FAJ - it's not fair to Pentax. Different > RM> market segments needs different products. I see no reason to > RM> fear that the upcoming high-end versions of the *ist lacks > RM> support for aperture ring. > >
