Hi Bruce ... I'd been thinking a bit about your comments even before you posted this message. Pentax has worked for me since 1967. Some Pentax models didn't appeal to me at all, so i didn't choose to buy or use them. There was almost two decades where what Pentax offered just didn't cut it for me. However, all the cameras I'd bought previously, or earlier models that I bought later (for example, I got a KM within the last year) have been quite satisfactory.
Just a couple of questions/comments: > Large buffer/fast write times How many shots can the istD handle in its buffer? The DS is supposed to take five RAW images, but if I space my exposures by about a second or a second and a half instead of machine gunning, I can capture eight frames, and that's with a slow SD card. Perhaps with a faster card the buffer might empty faster and even more frames can be captured. > low shutter lag time What's the lag time on the D? The DS seems OK, but I've been comparing it to the Sony. Sometimes I think it's a little slow, but that's just a subjective "feeling." Not made any comparisons to the Leica or other Pentax bodies. Do you know if the DS has less lag time? I'd think that if you were shooting in straight manual mode response time might be a little quicker than when using auto focus and other features. I wonder how many people here who lament the absence of image stabilization would really need the feature. It seems like a nice thing to have for certain types of photos, but judging by the pics in the PUG/PAW/PESO/GESO, not too many would benefit from the feature. Anyway, I'd like to see your comments open a good discussion about what features people actually use, and under what circumstance, rather than people just lambasting Pentax because they don't offer such features. Being a newbie to auto focus and cameras that can make several exposures in succession, I'm quite satisfied with everything Pentax offers. I can't think of anything more I'd want ... most of the time i can't even find use the standard features. I will say this, though, being able to use faster memory cards or have a buffer with a larger capacity that can empty faster might be useful for me, although, in the entire time I've had the DS, I've only found the need for that once, and that was just as much my fault for trying to machine gun a scene instead of taking my more usual, deliberate approach. But even so, with a deliberate approach I can still only get about eight frames. When I want a lot of fast frames, I can use any one of a number of manual cameras an leave the DS in the dust. I don't know what Canon or Nikon can do, but it seems that any digi will, at some point, need time to clear the buffer, so this is more a digi thing than a Pentax thing. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Bruce Dayton > I love my cameras and lenses! They are not perfect, but I have no > interest or desire to switch to another brand. In the past I have > used Olympus, Canon, Pentax and Nikon. And Pentax is where I ended > up. I like their interfaces and lenses. > > I was thinking this morning about the difference between skill and > technology. I will grant that there are some images that would be > very difficult to capture without certain technology. > > It might be fun to compile a list of technology that can't be had in a > a Pentax body, and then figure out what images require that technology > rather than skill to capture. > > The way I figure right now Pentax is missing: > Image stabilization > Image tracking AF (comparable to high end Canon/Nikon) > High frame/sec rate > Large buffer/fast write times > low shutter lag time > > Where they are in the forefront compared to other systems in a similar > price range is: > usable viewfinder (manual focus) > SMC coatings > HyperProgram/Manual > > So far, for me, I have been doing: > Nature > Scenics > Kids sports > Portraits > Weddings > > In all but kids sports, I manually focus - so the viewfinder on the > Pentax is a positive over other brands in price range > > I find that the buffer size and write speed does cause a few problems > here and there when a sequence needs more shots than the buffer - this > is not machine gun stuff, but something like wedding processional > where 6-8 couples walk down the aisle one after the other. The shots > may be 2-3 seconds apart, but the buffer fills and I can miss a shot > or two this way. Or when a base stealing occurs - shot over at first > for the start of the steal, couple of shots sliding into second and > then an overthrow so the runner is up an running to third and slide. > > There are times when I'll have an order for a 16X20 - 20X30 print > where it would be nice to have a little more resolution - it's > liveable, but not ideal. > > So for my usage, Pentax is not doing to badly. If I had Nikon, I > would be in no better shape - with nothing between a D70 (not a usable > camera for me - horrible viewfinder) and a D2x (can't afford it), I > would still be nursing along the old D100, waiting for them to > actually put out a mid level replacment. > > Any others care to comment? > > -- > Bruce > > > Tuesday, October 25, 2005, 7:10:42 PM, you wrote: > > TR> Why don't you all just change the group to Pentax Dissing Mailing List? > > TR> Does anyone on this list like their products besides me? > > TR> I'm sick of all this whining and complaining. You all sound like a bunch of > TR> four year olds. > > TR> Pentax makes great lenses. They're trying to catch up with the new body > TR> that's in the pipeline. Give them a break for crissakes. > > TR> Tom Reese > >
