Yeah, the Sigma lot seems to have gone eerily quite for a while. The price was tempting, and I liked the idea of the technology too. I don't buy the general derision of Sigma stuff in the industry, but I would rather not change my glass. I would still rather the SD9 to the 300D personally, but then I always go for the underdog!
> -----Original Message----- > From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 13 October 2003 19:52 > To: pentax list > Subject: RE: Has Pentax missed again? > > > On 13/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: > > >I have taken over 600 shots in my istD in the last month. I would > >never have taken that many on film unless there was a > special occasion > >or something. I have gotten some shots of the family which are > >absolutely stunning and which I would have missed were I using film > >because I would not have had the camera in my hand so often. > Working > >this way you can capture moments you would have missed using your > >normal film techniques, but you have to be much more determined to > >throw away shots which don't work. With film I tended to keep even > >slightly blurred shots of the kids because they were records of a > >moment/mood/expression. > > Rob, I bet you are soooooooooo relieved you didn't cave in to > the Sigma DSLR a while back ;-) The *ist D is a little cutey. > > > > > Cheers, > Cotty > > > ___/\__ > || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche > ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps > _____________________________ > Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk > >
