The first is really a non-issue with the *ist-D!
Test performed just now:
Lay the camera on the desk, lens mount down, no lens, so the body is perfectly horizontal.
Ensure the strap isn't obstructing the card door.
Open the card door.
Push the card eject button.
Retrieve the card from where it landed - 10 cm. away from the camera!
Obviously, even tilting the camera slightly down will be enough to ensure the card flies out and you will have to catch it before it hits the floor!
Why on earth would I need it to perform better than that?
While the lack of a histogram on instant review might be important to some users, to those of us who don't use instant review anyway, it's of no consequence, and certainly not a serious drawback. Even starting from having the camera switched off, it took me less than 3 seconds to get to the histogram for the last (RAW) image I shot last night.
I tend to think, after reading many reviews in different magazines, and after listening to some of the comments reported here, that reviewers in general seem to need to find some negative aspect of any Pentax, camera or lens, while gross faults (including massive exposure problems with the EOS300 and the D70) are glossed over. I include the interpretation of MTF charts where Pentax lens have obviously returned much better values, more consistently across the aperture range than the others in the same test conditions, and yet the Pentax is nearly always marked down, or dismissed with some comment such as " the Brand X lens is much sharper wide open ,and is therefore the editor's choice" blah blah blah. Could it be a coincidence that Brand X is the biggest advertiser in the magazine? Surely not!
John Coyle Brisbane, Australia
----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Cook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <pentax-discuss@pdml.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: *istD-flaws
A Luminous Landscape review from 2003 maintains the following: "Regrettably Pentax has missed the mark with the *ist D ... they can't ignore ... two serious flaws ‹ a highly problematic card compartment and the lack of a histogram and highlight alert in post-exposure review mode (only on subsequent image playback, but not right after taking the shot) ... The latter can probably be fixed with a firmware upgrade. The CF card eject problem likely needs a body redesign" Has Pentax fixed these problems in later-produced bodies or through firmware upgrades? Peter Sweden
The short answer is I believe that both "problems" were "fixed" in the *istDS. I don't own one so I don't know for sure but reading the reports from others, I think they have been.
From my perspective as an owner of the *istD, neither of these "problems" are particularly noteworthy. After reading a number of reviews (by owners, users and possibly pretenders as we have seen recently) I bought the *istD and I bought some Post It "flags" from an office supply store. The flags I cut down a bit and stuck one to each of my CF cards so that if it didn't eject well from teh *istD I would have some substantial to pull it out with. The flags work perfectly and are needed on some CF cards and not on others.
As for the lack of a histogram, I could care less, because I turned off the instant review feature because it was annoying at night, I never looked at it and it was needlessly using battery power.
To me the most glaring "flaw" is the the door for the batteries. When using the rechargeable CVR batteries one has to apply too much pressure, in my opinion, to close the door and I worry that it might break. Of course Pentax doesn't recommend using the rechargables so calling it "flaw" isn't fair but it is to me.
I love the *istD and would buy another if it were within my budget.
Larry
