Hello Shel, My thoughts were brought to the surface by the new round of lamentations. I do find it amusing that the competition is Canon. None of the other manufacturers are doing tons better than Pentax at the moment - for bringing out new, competitive equipment.
There have been a some who comment negatively that I am still waiting to see their work to show how they are unable to get the shots they want because of lack of technology. I suspect most are due to lack of skill. Those who have truly found the roadblock have purchased another system. As to buffer for the D - it is 5 frames of raw (if you turn off NR, you get 6). The write speed with Lexar WA 40X cards is about 7-8 seconds per frame. This is an area that the DS has improved a fair bit. I was thinking it was about 3 seconds. As to the lag time on the shutter - this has mostly to do with split second timing - basically when everything is set manually, so all the camera has to do is fire the shutter, there is still a tiny lag time (measured in milliseconds) from pressing to when the shutter actually fires. I have heard that both the Nikon D2H and D2X are very fast. Of course, we are talking a slightly different class of camera here. Anyway, when I don't take the shots I want, it is mostly due to my lack of skill or creativity. Out of all the cameras I have owned since I was 16 years old, the only one I truly hated was a Canon A-1. Nothing wrong with it, but I wanted to work one way and it was designed about as opposite from me as possible. Wednesday, October 26, 2005, 11:08:37 AM, you wrote: SB> Hi Bruce ... SB> I'd been thinking a bit about your comments even before you posted this SB> message. Pentax has worked for me since 1967. Some Pentax models didn't SB> appeal to me at all, so i didn't choose to buy or use them. There was SB> almost two decades where what Pentax offered just didn't cut it for me. SB> However, all the cameras I'd bought previously, or earlier models that I SB> bought later (for example, I got a KM within the last year) have been quite SB> satisfactory. SB> Just a couple of questions/comments: >> Large buffer/fast write times SB> How many shots can the istD handle in its buffer? The DS is supposed to SB> take five RAW images, but if I space my exposures by about a second or a SB> second and a half instead of machine gunning, I can capture eight frames, SB> and that's with a slow SD card. Perhaps with a faster card the buffer SB> might empty faster and even more frames can be captured. >> low shutter lag time SB> What's the lag time on the D? The DS seems OK, but I've been comparing it SB> to the Sony. Sometimes I think it's a little slow, but that's just a SB> subjective "feeling." Not made any comparisons to the Leica or other Pentax SB> bodies. Do you know if the DS has less lag time? I'd think that if you SB> were shooting in straight manual mode response time might be a little SB> quicker than when using auto focus and other features. SB> I wonder how many people here who lament the absence of image stabilization SB> would really need the feature. It seems like a nice thing to have for SB> certain types of photos, but judging by the pics in the PUG/PAW/PESO/GESO, SB> not too many would benefit from the feature. SB> Anyway, I'd like to see your comments open a good discussion about what SB> features people actually use, and under what circumstance, rather than SB> people just lambasting Pentax because they don't offer such features. SB> Being a newbie to auto focus and cameras that can make several exposures in SB> succession, I'm quite satisfied with everything Pentax offers. I can't SB> think of anything more I'd want ... most of the time i can't even find use SB> the standard features. SB> I will say this, though, being able to use faster memory cards or have a SB> buffer with a larger capacity that can empty faster might be useful for me, SB> although, in the entire time I've had the DS, I've only found the need for SB> that once, and that was just as much my fault for trying to machine gun a SB> scene instead of taking my more usual, deliberate approach. But even so, SB> with a deliberate approach I can still only get about eight frames. When I SB> want a lot of fast frames, I can use any one of a number of manual cameras SB> an leave the DS in the dust. I don't know what Canon or Nikon can do, but SB> it seems that any digi will, at some point, need time to clear the buffer, SB> so this is more a digi thing than a Pentax thing. SB> Shel >> [Original Message] >> From: Bruce Dayton >> I love my cameras and lenses! They are not perfect, but I have no >> interest or desire to switch to another brand. In the past I have >> used Olympus, Canon, Pentax and Nikon. And Pentax is where I ended >> up. I like their interfaces and lenses. >> >> I was thinking this morning about the difference between skill and >> technology. I will grant that there are some images that would be >> very difficult to capture without certain technology. >> >> It might be fun to compile a list of technology that can't be had in a >> a Pentax body, and then figure out what images require that technology >> rather than skill to capture. >> >> The way I figure right now Pentax is missing: >> Image stabilization >> Image tracking AF (comparable to high end Canon/Nikon) >> High frame/sec rate >> Large buffer/fast write times >> low shutter lag time >> >> Where they are in the forefront compared to other systems in a similar >> price range is: >> usable viewfinder (manual focus) >> SMC coatings >> HyperProgram/Manual >> >> So far, for me, I have been doing: >> Nature >> Scenics >> Kids sports >> Portraits >> Weddings >> >> In all but kids sports, I manually focus - so the viewfinder on the >> Pentax is a positive over other brands in price range >> >> I find that the buffer size and write speed does cause a few problems >> here and there when a sequence needs more shots than the buffer - this >> is not machine gun stuff, but something like wedding processional >> where 6-8 couples walk down the aisle one after the other. The shots >> may be 2-3 seconds apart, but the buffer fills and I can miss a shot >> or two this way. Or when a base stealing occurs - shot over at first >> for the start of the steal, couple of shots sliding into second and >> then an overthrow so the runner is up an running to third and slide. >> >> There are times when I'll have an order for a 16X20 - 20X30 print >> where it would be nice to have a little more resolution - it's >> liveable, but not ideal. >> >> So for my usage, Pentax is not doing to badly. If I had Nikon, I >> would be in no better shape - with nothing between a D70 (not a usable >> camera for me - horrible viewfinder) and a D2x (can't afford it), I >> would still be nursing along the old D100, waiting for them to >> actually put out a mid level replacment. >> >> Any others care to comment? >> >> -- >> Bruce >> >> >> Tuesday, October 25, 2005, 7:10:42 PM, you wrote: >> >> TR> Why don't you all just change the group to Pentax Dissing Mailing SB> List? >> >> TR> Does anyone on this list like their products besides me? >> >> TR> I'm sick of all this whining and complaining. You all sound like a SB> bunch of >> TR> four year olds. >> >> TR> Pentax makes great lenses. They're trying to catch up with the new SB> body >> TR> that's in the pipeline. Give them a break for crissakes. >> >> TR> Tom Reese >> >>
