William Robb wrote: > I updated from an istD to a K10. It was quite a jump. There > are still things > I prefer about the istD, but the image quality and responsiveness > improvements in the K10 are very nice. While I am not saing I > am giving the > K20 a pass, I am much less motivated to by into it > immediately, I am tempted > to wait and see what the higher end camera that was hinted at > turns out to > be. If it is a 645, then the K20 would probably end up as > part of my kit, if > it turns out to be a higher performance specc'd K-Mount, then > I would bypass > the K20 in it's favour. > > The K10 is fast enough and has sufficient imaging qualities > for most of what > I do, unfortunately, what it is missing, and apparently the > K20 shares this > failing, is really fast auto focus. > I do a lot of action pictures of my dogs, the K10 often can't > keep up, and > no amount of extra megapixels will fix that.
Thanks, noted. I'm very interested in what you say about auto focus. Until I had the *ist D, I'd not had this facility before and for the pictures I shot, compared to manual focus, weren't as sharp. Now, the big problem is I'm getting older and although I've got away without bi-focal specs this time around, my eyes aren't what they were, and no doubt next year I'll have to have them next year. I'm getting to the stage I'll find auto focus more and more useful and I won't know how good the image is until it's on a large computer screen! I know for certain I would already need to rely on auto focus for the sort of action pictures you take or I wouldn't get any in focus at all. Then I'd have to call it art. Malcolm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
