I have had ZX-10's - it is more capable than those. Almost like a film *ist, except that the film *ist has most of the dedicated switches. Probably a ZX-7. Electronically it can do most things (metering modes, continuous AF, wireless flash, etc), but must use menus to select all those things rather than having the switches readily available.
The *istD is much like the PZ-1p. So, I'll say it again, those who want to control the settings on the camera on a regular basis, will like the D, those who want mostly the automation to handle things will be ok with the DS. If you are happy using a ZX-7, then the DS will make you happy. If you get frustrated using the ZX-7, you will get frustrated using the DS and should get the D. When Canon came out with the Rebel D, they stripped quite a bit to leave an obvious difference between it and the 10D. When Nikon came out with the D70, it was in many ways a better camera than the D100. So much so, that nobody would buy a D100 over the D70. In Pentax's case, the didn't strip as much as the RebelD, but didn't make it so close to the *istD, that one cannot tell them apart and more advanced users will still prefer the *istD. -- Best regards, Bruce Thursday, December 2, 2004, 5:49:08 PM, you wrote: etn> Quoting Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> My feeling all along and after handling a DS in the store yesterday is >> that those who are happy with something less than the MZ-5n, will be >> happy with the DS. Basically people who are going to leave it on one >> of the program modes and not change much of anything very often. >> Those who like the handling of the MZ-5n and up (PZ-1p, MZ-S, etc) >> will be much happier with the *istD as it has the settings that would >> be changed most often on dedicated switches and buttons. etn> So is it more of a "digital ZX-10" then, with the *istD being more of etn> a "digital PZ-1"? etn> (in a general sense of course) etn> ERNR
