On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 09:53:02AM -0700, Tom C wrote: > > Some of us have compained that Pentax did not have an upgrade offering to > the *istD. That was met with claims that the *ist D does everything they > want, 6.1MP gave images with all the quality they wanted, why would we want > something more? > > Now that a successor has been announced, many of those same people have > already got in line to purchase one when it's released.
I think that's rather overstating the case. I'm sure you'd put both myself and Paul Stenquist firmly in the camp of *ist D supporters; we've both said that it's a camera capable of delivering the results, and that some of the most loudly-bemoaned shortcomings (you know the ones I mean, I'm sure :-) just aren't that important to the way we work. But we've both made it perfectly clear that if Pentax came out with a camera with a somewhat higher pixel count, and decent improvements in frame rate and burst length, we'd definitely consider buying one, as long as it was otherwise at least as good as the D. For some people, the DS (and, especially, the DS2) is a cheaper way to get that faster write performance. For me (I can't speak for Paul) that is outweighed by the absence of a grip accessory, and the change in control style (I shoot in HyperProgram mode over 90% of the time). The CF vs. SD card counted against the DS, too, but it looks as if I'm just going to have to bite the bullet on that one :-( We haven't yet seen detailed enough specifications of the new camera to know what the frame rate and burst size will be, but I'm sure they will be better than the D (even with the larger RAW file size). We're also led to believe it will have other features, such as SR, which I for one find tempting. Are they necessary? No. Desirable? Definitely.
