On Nov 9, 2005, at 9:29 PM, Tom C wrote:
The reasons not to buy an *ist D are pretty simple, IMO. 1. It's now a hair's breadth away from being a two year old camera.
I've owned my Canon 10D for over two years now and it was 9 months old in the field when I bought it. It still takes superb photographs. It has a larger buffer than the D, but is probably even slower on write operations. it has NEVER been a problem to me, either in action, sports, still or panoramic photography. If the 10D were still in production, and I hadn't gone to the Pentax line, I'd have no problems buying a second 10D body.
The bottom line is that a camera is a tool. The Pentax *ist D/DS/DS2/ DL are all good cameras that serve the job well. If the tool does the job you want, it is a good tool. If it is inadequate to your job, you need a different one.
Whether another make is "pummeling" them on features is inconsequential since I haven't seen any evidence to prove that the image quality is substantially different. If the camera does the job you want, costs what you want to pay, and will survive in use for the period of time that it ought to ... and 5-10 years seems a reasonable lifespan for a camera that's actually used as it ought to be ... I count their value as how much use I get out of them, not how long I own them anyway. I suspect both the DS bodies I own will last that long, and provide good value as well.
Godfrey
