The later bodies lack several of the D's capabilities, like continuous
focus in all exposure modes;
Firmware v2 allowed AF-C operation in all modes on the DS body. The
DL, DS2, DL2 all had it to start with.
... most functions available via knobs rather than
menu-diving.
There have been many debates about this. I find the DS layout nearly
ideal, better than the D in several respects (like having ISO setting
on a dedicated Fn menu rather than having to change the selector mode
and look in a different place to set it, etc). Both are functional
and work well overall. It is so rare that I touch the Menu button at
all, the notion of "menu-diving" seems overstated. I do use the Fn
menu often ... usually to change ISO setting.
This is the preferred body EXCEPT for those who like to shoot
continuously. All the other bodies are faster. They are also
cheaper,
which is obviously a consideration, too.
I don't know about "preferred". I prefer the DS over the D.
One or more of the latest bodies will not work with any flash other
than
(I think) the (expensive but good) AF360FTZ.
The DL/DL2 bodies only support P-TTL flash metering, so to get all
the body's features you need a P-TTL capable flash unit. That's the
AF360FGZ or AF540FGZ from Pentax, or the Sigma EF 500 DG Super.
Of course, any of the bodies will work with any manual flash unit, or
any flash unit that contains its own auto-metering unit built-in.
Wireless control of a fully dedicated flash unit with the built-in
flash is only available with the D model, but that again limits you
to the same three flash units as the D. Wireless control of a fully
dedicated flash unit is also possible with the DS, presuming you have
two of them (one on the camera).
Godfrey
