Ohm he shouldn't. But that decision should be based on the $800 part of the total cost, not on the $20.
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:37:15PM -0400, graywolf wrote: > Well, if his istD does what he needs it to do why should he spend that $820? > > My pocket pc, laptop, and camera all take CF. Now the camera also takes XD > cards, the laptop also takes pcmcia cards, and the pocket pc also takes SD > cards: while the laptop and desktop take usb-flash as well. Which would you > standardize on? > > By the way, I probably have the most expensive card reader on the list. I use > the IBM Thinkpad over the wireless network to read CF into the desktop. Think > of it a $3000 card reader <grin>. Of course I only paid $300 for the used > Thinkpad but that still is a pretty expensive card reader; luckily I have > other uses for it as well. > > -- > graywolf > http://www.graywolfphoto.com > http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf > "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" > ----------------------------------- > > > John Francis wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 08:59:15AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> I opted to stick with my *ist D because I had a few CF cards. I didn't > >> want to have to spend more money to get SD cards to use on a newer Pentax. > > > > Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. A 2GB 150x card in now, what, $20? > > Saving that kind of money is definitely a reason to forego any possible > > improvements in camera technology. Especially since the only plausible > > step-up from a *ist-D at present is the K10D, which is going to set you > > back $800 or so. > > > > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
