On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:57:43AM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote: > Doug Brewer wrote: > > >Tell ya what I plan to do. I plan to get hold of the K10D, look it > >over, run it through some field tests, and decide what I like and > >don't like about it. Then I'll decide if what I don't like about it > >outweighs what I do like about it, and go from there. > > Very commendable. > > I have an even simpler plan: I'm just going to buy it. > > There's the increased pixel count > The built-in shake reduction > And the lower minimum ISO > And the faster flash sync > And the bigger, faster buffer > And many other items... > > But basically my reasoning is that there's just no question that it's > going to be better than my ist-D, if for no other reason than it's had > several years of Pentax' (and the industry's) technological advancement > behind it. > > And it's going to cost almost FIVE HUNDRED dollars *less* than my ist-D > did. > > How anyone can engage in any hand-wringing at all is a mystery to me.
Five hundred? I paid $1695 for my *ist-D. The K10D will be half that. And definitely worth it just for improved auto-focus, the deeper buffer, and ISO 100. Everything else is a bonus. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
