I think you're making a couple of very questionable assumptions. First, and most important - the new camera will in no way be based on the *ist DS. You might just as well say it will be based on the *ist-D, as it has two control wheels (and, most believe, will have an accessory grip). That wouldn't be true, either, but it's at least as accurate as saying it will be based on the DS.
Secondly, you won't be paying more for a D (with compact flash) than for the new camera - Pentax have made it pretty clear that the new body will be aimed at a price point above the D (and way above the DS); I expect it to cost around the same as the D200 - maybe a little more. SD cards are beginning to get almost as cheap as CF cards, and are already available in 2GB (and even 4GB) sizes. By the time the new camera gets to the stores I expect the difference in price between CF and SD will be negligible, and that higher capacities will be available. I wouldn't want more than 4GB on a single card, even with RAW files of 20GB or so (which is what I'm anticipating for the new camera). And by now I'm not sure it makes sense to buy Microdrives - I got a couple of 2GB CF cards a while back, and retired my Microdrives. Finally - if you're shooting RAW, there's very little to choose between a D and a DS. The DS has a larger rear LCD screen (and the DS2 has one even larger), and a better four-way controller. Other differences are mostly in the ergonomics - the DS only has a single control wheel (vs. the two on the D), and has different things available directly via dedicated buttons (as opposed to being set via menu settings). The later cameras also have a larger buffer (and write to the memory cards much faster), and can visually show highlight warnings superimposed on the display. There are, supposedly, some differences in the default settings for JPEG conversion - I haven't been able to confirm this myself. On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 08:53:09PM -0800, Brian Dipert wrote: > My reason for earlier asking about the storage card format of the upcoming > 10 Mpixel DSLR is that I just bought a new *ist D on clearance from Amazon > for $1199, as a backup for my existing *ist D. Here's where I'm torn: > 1) 10 Mpixel resolution will certainly be helpful when doing extreme > enlargements, or said another way enlargements of a small portion of a > captured image, and > 2) the *ist DS/DS2 on which I assume the new camera will be based makes some > feature advancements over the *ist D, albeit with a few features discarded > along the way (I admit I'm a bit fuzzy on how the *ist D compares to the > *ist DS/DS2, and would welcome folks' feedback on this), but > 3) Especially for those of us that primarily shoot RAW, CompactFlash storage > capability, versus SD card, is desireable both from an absolute capacity > standpoint and cost/GByte standpoint (esp when MicroDrives are factored into > the mix). > > So what do folks think? The newer cameras are cheaper, and arguably > better-featured (again, data and opinions are welcomed), but only work with > capacity-deficient SD cards. Does it make sense to pay more simply for > CompactFlash capacity? > ============================== > Brian Dipert > Senior Technical Editor: Mass Storage, Multimedia (audio, displays, 2-D and > 3-D graphics, and still and video imaging), PCs and Peripherals > EDN Magazine: http://www.edn.com > My blog: http://www.edn.com/briansbrain > 5000 V Street > Sacramento, CA 95817 > (916) 760-0159, fax (781) 734-8038 > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Visit me at http://www.bdipert.com
