Note that I ran single-point only, not multi-point AF. The later may not have changed as much, but I saw noticably better AF on the centre point from the D to the K100D.
-Adam Jaume Lahuerta wrote: > Yeah, I see your point...but I like small equipment, so for the moment it > seems that I'll skip the K10D, so the K100D would be the only current choice > (and it seems that it will be for many, many months). > > When I look to my friend's DL viewfinder I don't perceive a significant loss > over my DS, so I guess the key is to know if the K100D AF is way better than > the DS (like someone suggested in another thread), or only slightly better, > as Godfrey perceived himself. > > An improvement in jpgs wold be also welcome, as I am still not that > comfortable processing RAWs, but, frankly, with a bit of sharpness, I am > quite satisfied with my current ones. > > (Ah, I also like a lot the 2.5'' LCD, it makes a difference over the DS 2'' > although this alone wouldn't make worth the cahange at all) > > > ----- Mensaje original ---- > De: Fernando <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > Enviado: jueves, 17 de mayo, 2007 20:49:58 > Asunto: Re: Anyone moved from istDS to K100D? > > This was my logic, I didn't want to trade viewfinder for SR, so I > waited for the K10D. As Godfrey said, if I didn't have a *istDS I > would've gotten a K100D with no regrets. > > On 5/17/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I still enjoy using the *ist DS body. It is delightfully small and >> compact. >> >> A friend loaned me a K100D body to test for an afternoon. It is >> slightly larger/heavier than the *ist DS. Autofocus is slightly >> faster. The viewfinder is slightly brighter but also slightly smaller >> and not quite as contrasty. The AntiShake is a useful addition. But >> fit it to a tripod, put the same lens on it, focus it properly and >> get the exposure right ... there is no difference at all in a RAW >> exposure file. A little faster writes to card memory, supposedly, but >> a smaller capture buffer so it's poorer on sequences. >> >> I didn't feel the AS and small improvement in AF speed balanced where >> the DS was at least as good or the expense of an upgrade. If I didn't >> own a DS, it would have been a good buy. >> >> G >> >> >> On May 17, 2007, at 8:59 AM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: >> >>> If so... >>> Do you find the K100D AF to be much better (quicker, specially in >>> low light)? >>> Does the SR really work for you? (I mean, it let you take pictures >>> that were impossible to do with the DS?) >>> Do you find that the K100D jpgs are much better than the DS ones? >>> Do you miss the DS bigger viewfinder? >>> Do you miss the DS bigger buffer? >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
