Hi Shel, Given your preference for manual cameras (which I share btw), I'm sure you would love the *ist D. Because with a K or M lens, it's exactly that: a manual camera with a center weighted meter. You turn your aperture wheel the old fashioned way, by hand. You push a button to stop down and get your shutter speed (kind of like a spotmatic on that count). The camera will change the speed for you (okay, so that's one concession to modernity), but you can pick another shutter speed with a wheel, just as you would on that spotmatic, an MX or an M3. The wheel just happens to be in a different place, and it doesn't have numbers on it. Finally, you focus or refocus and shoot. You can leave the camera set on manual all the time if you use only the classic glass. Hell, you can leave it on manual with new glass as well and just chuck the instruction book <g>. And of course you don't HAVE TO use the meter, you can just guesstimate shutter speed and ap if so inclined. Paul
Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Boris ... > > Of course, to a point, everyone is right in this discussion. > > I was actually being a little facetious when I made the > comment about everyone here being "... dedicated to getting > the best results from their cameras". While that may be > true for many people who actively participate in these > discussions, there are, I know, quite a number of people on > this list who do not have such dedication. Quite a few have > said at one time or another that, for them, "good enough is > good enough." And for those people it's quite possible that > these smarter cameras do have a "dumbing" effect. > > I'll let you in on a little secret: the reason I prefer > manual cameras is because I'm lazy. I know that if I had a > camera with too much automation, I'd rely on it more than > I'd like. At least in my case, Bill Robb's correct ... it's > easy to fall into poor habits. So I have to make myself > think. And when I don't, the quality of my work suffers. I > cannot believe that I am unique in this regard. > > I'm also too lazy to sit down and read a 200 page manual > that tells me how to do what I already know electronically, > through menus and interfaces and print outs and with > directions given to me by flashing lights and the occasional > beeping voice of a camera that "thinks" I should do it its > way. One of the things I HATE about many new cameras is the > lights that flash when the camera program says I'm using the > camera at too slow a shutter speed. > > Well, off to get some tea ... > > shel > > Boris Liberman wrote: > > > Shel, you're right, up to the point. I really cannot judge it like > > Bill Robb can as I have no such experience like his. > > > > It is a matter of offer and demand. I doubt that more than 1% of > > people who buy P&S (now digi P&S) cameras would ever use it for > > anything but family album snap shooting. They might be photogs by > > dictionary definition of a word, but I don't think you referred to > > them. > > > > It is enough for them to feel very good for themselves just because > > they had this little nifty gadget with them at the time when their > > grandchild jumped three stairs down for the first time. I have two P&S > > cameras, one of which is on indefinitely long loan to a former > > classmate whose only wish is to take snaps of his son. And Fuji > > Discovery 38-90 is ideal for the given demand. > > > > As you said however, the people on this list and similar folk "are all > > dedicated to getting the best results from their cameras". None of > > them will not be made dumber by a smarter camera. > > > > Now, take all several dozens folks here who bought *istD. Obviously, > > the *istD is the *smartest* camera Pentax produced so far. Will it > > make them dumber? I doubt so very much. > > > > As Bill Robb mentioned, and as has been mentioned on other threads, it > > appears that average level of average shooter gets lower. It probably > > *should* be the case, because photography becomes more and more > > accessible, more and more automatic, more and more for the dumb. But > > let them be. > > > > It is the same with everything - with stereos, with cars, with > > computers, with everything. I can press just one button on my scanner > > and it will scan. I can plug and unplug stuff from my PC and it will > > not bluescreen at me. Why not? For some of the things, you'd like to > > be able to turn auto wunder button off, and thankfully you can. For > > some other things you chose not to. > > > > I still fail to see something here, don't I? > > > > Boris
