I received both attempts ;)
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:20:27 +1000, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 29 Jan 2005 at 17:00, Peter Smekal wrote: > > > Another argument not to get the *ist D blown into the wind ...gggrrr ... > > thank you guys ... :-) > > Read the previous comments as you will but for my money the card door and > eject > mech is a bad design and still is a bad design after I've been using it for a > year. My cards are still a pig to get out (especially compared to previous > cameras I've owned that also used CF). The post view mode selection sequence > is > clumsy and could be remedied with software. A highlights feature (like on the > *ist DS) would be very handy (I guess that's why they added it to the *ist DS) > and the joy-stick on the back is an absolute pig of a design, one of the > poorest implementations of such a control that I've used. We have an iPaq > Pocket-PC and a Muvo MP3 player they both have smaller joy-sticks of similar > appearance but they both seem to work far better than the Pentax control. > These > gripes may sound minor but they've caused me frustration in the field so I > remember them. > > I hope whatever comes next addresses these problems but if you are prepared to > ignore them the *ist D is a fine camera but will probably only be available > used in a very short time. The *ist DS design appears to have already > addressed > these minor gripes from what I read. > > 2nd attempt to post :-( > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > -- ------------------------ Thibouille
