Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Rob Studdert wrote: On 11 Nov 2005 at 12:55, John Forbes wrote: Not entirely true, Mike. I saw a documentry featuring turdcams, and although the elephants did spot a couple of them, most survived. One of the best wild-life docs I've seen. If it's the doco I saw the elephants cottoned on to the camera lark and started started booting it about like a football. Good stuff. That's the one. There was probably more than one camera but it was that bit that stuck in my memory. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
I remember these. There was one with lions another with elephants, both featuring David Attenborough doing the voice over. http://www.jdp.co.uk/progs/lions_spy_in_the_den.php http://www.jdp.co.uk/progs/elephants.php Dave On 11/13/05, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob Studdert wrote: On 11 Nov 2005 at 12:55, John Forbes wrote: Not entirely true, Mike. I saw a documentry featuring turdcams, and although the elephants did spot a couple of them, most survived. One of the best wild-life docs I've seen. If it's the doco I saw the elephants cottoned on to the camera lark and started started booting it about like a football. Good stuff. That's the one. There was probably more than one camera but it was that bit that stuck in my memory. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On Nov 10, 2005, at 10:52 AM, Christian wrote: I agree with you about getting close to the subjects and I try to do this in my own nature (bird) photography. After looking at Brandt's photos, I must say that you and I have VERY different ideas about photography and doing the subjects justice I don't like his technique at all. I hate the soft edges; it reminds me of glamour photos with a soft filter/lens. The soft focus (or post processing; whatever it is) ruins otherwise very nice closeups/portraits. I DO like the framing and composition of his wider shots. In my opinion he is trying too hard to make his photos look vintage and that bothers me; it isn't genuine and it makes it look like he is trying to be something that he is not. Except for the wide shots showing the animals and the sweeping vistas of their environment, it doesn't (in my opinion) do them any justice. I took a look at these too and my feeling is that the web isn't doing some of them justice at all. The first thing I thought looking at the elephant close-ups is that these are surely intended to be shown as large prints perhaps several feet to a side. That would put you, the viewer, close to where Brandt presumably was with the camera. The the fall-off and vignetting would then mimic how your eyes would have seen the real thing. I also suspect this is not an effect you could duplicate easily with a 600mm lens? I'd guess that if any of them were shown at any sort of decent size the reaction of most people would be 'wow'. Chris
Re: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
From: Chris Stoddart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/11/11 Fri AM 08:36:36 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? On Nov 10, 2005, at 10:52 AM, Christian wrote: I agree with you about getting close to the subjects and I try to do this in my own nature (bird) photography. After looking at Brandt's photos, I must say that you and I have VERY different ideas about photography and doing the subjects justice I don't like his technique at all. I hate the soft edges; it reminds me of glamour photos with a soft filter/lens. The soft focus (or post processing; whatever it is) ruins otherwise very nice closeups/portraits. I DO like the framing and composition of his wider shots. In my opinion he is trying too hard to make his photos look vintage and that bothers me; it isn't genuine and it makes it look like he is trying to be something that he is not. Except for the wide shots showing the animals and the sweeping vistas of their environment, it doesn't (in my opinion) do them any justice. I took a look at these too and my feeling is that the web isn't doing some of them justice at all. The first thing I thought looking at the elephant close-ups is that these are surely intended to be shown as large prints perhaps several feet to a side. That would put you, the viewer, close to where Brandt presumably was with the camera. The the fall-off and vignetting would then mimic how your eyes would have seen the real thing. I also suspect this is not an effect you could duplicate easily with a 600mm lens? The Pentax 600/4 has noticeable falloff, wide open. I'd guess that if any of them were shown at any sort of decent size the reaction of most people would be 'wow'. Chris - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, mike wilson wrote: close to where Brandt presumably was with the camera. The the fall-off and vignetting would then mimic how your eyes would have seen the real thing. I also suspect this is not an effect you could duplicate easily with a 600mm lens? The Pentax 600/4 has noticeable falloff, wide open. No, I meant working in combination with the perspective of the picture. Presumably if he's close with a 6x7 he's shooting with something in the 'standard lens' sort of focal length? The falloff shown in some of those pictures is obviously done post-processing, but then when combined with a standard lens perspective and shown at effectively life-size, you'd in some ways mimic the feeling of reality? In contrast, a picture taken standing XXX metres away with a 600mm lens you wouldn't have the same effect because of compression? You'd just end up with what some here might already have called a nice picture ruined by softening and falloff :-) Of course that could be utter bollox (tm). Personally, standing anything like that close to a cow elephant with her calf and firing a 6x7... no thanks! Chris
Re: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
From: Chris Stoddart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/11/11 Fri AM 09:39:01 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, mike wilson wrote: close to where Brandt presumably was with the camera. The the fall-off and vignetting would then mimic how your eyes would have seen the real thing. I also suspect this is not an effect you could duplicate easily with a 600mm lens? The Pentax 600/4 has noticeable falloff, wide open. No, I meant working in combination with the perspective of the picture. Presumably if he's close with a 6x7 he's shooting with something in the 'standard lens' sort of focal length? The falloff shown in some of those pictures is obviously done post-processing, but then when combined with a standard lens perspective and shown at effectively life-size, you'd in some ways mimic the feeling of reality? In contrast, a picture taken standing XXX metres away with a 600mm lens you wouldn't have the same effect because of compression? You'd just end up with what some here might already have called a nice picture ruined by softening and falloff :-) Got you. I thought you were referring specifically to the falloff. I need to learn to read more carefully. Of course that could be utter bollox (tm). Personally, standing anything like that close to a cow elephant with her calf and firing a 6x7... no thanks! I think there is a site somewhere detailing a chap's efforts to picture heffalumps close up by disguising his wunderkam as a turd. Of course, they were far too smart to fall for that and did a Mexican hat dance all over his gear. Too sad. m - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Not entirely true, Mike. I saw a documentry featuring turdcams, and although the elephants did spot a couple of them, most survived. One of the best wild-life docs I've seen. John On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 11:22:05 -, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Chris Stoddart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/11/11 Fri AM 09:39:01 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, mike wilson wrote: close to where Brandt presumably was with the camera. The the fall-off and vignetting would then mimic how your eyes would have seen the real thing. I also suspect this is not an effect you could duplicate easily with a 600mm lens? The Pentax 600/4 has noticeable falloff, wide open. No, I meant working in combination with the perspective of the picture. Presumably if he's close with a 6x7 he's shooting with something in the 'standard lens' sort of focal length? The falloff shown in some of those pictures is obviously done post-processing, but then when combined with a standard lens perspective and shown at effectively life-size, you'd in some ways mimic the feeling of reality? In contrast, a picture taken standing XXX metres away with a 600mm lens you wouldn't have the same effect because of compression? You'd just end up with what some here might already have called a nice picture ruined by softening and falloff :-) Got you. I thought you were referring specifically to the falloff. I need to learn to read more carefully. Of course that could be utter bollox (tm). Personally, standing anything like that close to a cow elephant with her calf and firing a 6x7... no thanks! I think there is a site somewhere detailing a chap's efforts to picture heffalumps close up by disguising his wunderkam as a turd. Of course, they were far too smart to fall for that and did a Mexican hat dance all over his gear. Too sad. m - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Why not a Leica/LX solution, with both the straps on one side? (The opposite side, hopefully.) John On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 00:25:55 -, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Guess I must be wierd that way. While I agree that flipping the slot would be an improvement, I've always liked the slot in the D. It's about perfect for me, the only real issue is the strap location. That is the problem. I just don't know where else they could put it and keep the compact body size. William Robb -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 2005-11-10 11:09, John Forbes wrote: It's not advertised much, but for the last nine months the D has generally been sold for the same price as the DS in the UK. while checking German EU prices: http://www.geizhals.at/deutschland/?fs=istdx=0y=0in= *istD: 1000 EUR *istDs: 600 EUR *istDL: 600 EUR price trend shows it down to 950 EUR, but never on *istDs level http://www.geizhals.at/eu/?phist=63313age=365 u may convert German prices almost 1:1 to USD: exchange rate is about 1 EUR = 1.20 USD, but the German tax (currently 16 %) is included. What are the UK prices? - Martin
Re: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/11/11 Fri PM 12:55:53 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Not entirely true, Mike. I saw a documentry featuring turdcams, and although the elephants did spot a couple of them, most survived. One of the best wild-life docs I've seen. John I'm sure I've seen a splattered one, done by elephants. There was an attempt to infiltrate a lion pride with disguised cameras on wheels that ended up the same way. Now I'll have to find it. 8-((( On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 11:22:05 -, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Chris Stoddart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/11/11 Fri AM 09:39:01 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, mike wilson wrote: close to where Brandt presumably was with the camera. The the fall-off and vignetting would then mimic how your eyes would have seen the real thing. I also suspect this is not an effect you could duplicate easily with a 600mm lens? The Pentax 600/4 has noticeable falloff, wide open. No, I meant working in combination with the perspective of the picture. Presumably if he's close with a 6x7 he's shooting with something in the 'standard lens' sort of focal length? The falloff shown in some of those pictures is obviously done post-processing, but then when combined with a standard lens perspective and shown at effectively life-size, you'd in some ways mimic the feeling of reality? In contrast, a picture taken standing XXX metres away with a 600mm lens you wouldn't have the same effect because of compression? You'd just end up with what some here might already have called a nice picture ruined by softening and falloff :-) Got you. I thought you were referring specifically to the falloff. I need to learn to read more carefully. Of course that could be utter bollox (tm). Personally, standing anything like that close to a cow elephant with her calf and firing a 6x7... no thanks! I think there is a site somewhere detailing a chap's efforts to picture heffalumps close up by disguising his wunderkam as a turd. Of course, they were far too smart to fall for that and did a Mexican hat dance all over his gear. Too sad. m - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 11/11/05, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed: http://www.nickbrandt.com/ f*(%^^*ing know-it-all web designers! What a terrible site. I'll have to tell him, one of my close friend designed the site :-) You can tell him from me that it's shit. I hate the dumbing down that goes on, that forces the viewer to take courses of actions with little control over the way back. The pics are not much better. Other than that it's fine. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
for certain types of action, you don't have to shoot quick bursts, but is that a reflection of knowing the camera's limits and not trying to exceed them, or because you simply aren't interested? Not interested. As I stated in a previous post I'm tying to get past the documentation shot. I think for some people, new to in- field animal shots, just capturing photographically, animals in the wild, is a real hoot. I've pretty much done that with the animals in Denali I seek to move to the next level, so I am selective in what I capture - does this cause me to miss some action ? Occasionally yes. Do I still follow an animal with my lens during a sequence? Sure. I just try to anticipate the right moment to press the release. but a sequence can be more powerful in telling a story. No argument here. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Nov 10, 2005 9:21 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? i can imagine a picture sequence of spawning salmon leaping a waterfall where you might want to capture a leap and a failure from beginning to end. one picture in the middle isn't the same impact as 10 or 15 in a row. think of WR's posted sample of an adult bald eagle attacking and snatching a fish from a juvenile. one image might catch the peak of the action, but a sequence can be more powerful in telling a story. Herb - Original Message - From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 9:49 AM Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? I shot similar moving sequences of caribou, moose, bear, beaver ptarmigan during my last trip to Denali in 04 and IIRC the buffer was only a very few times an issue. I may be more selective in what I shoot. PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
I don't care much for the design of the site either ... annoying to navigate and miserable to use with a dialup connection. Shel You meet the nicest people with a Pentax [Original Message] From: Cotty On 11/11/05, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed: http://www.nickbrandt.com/ f*(%^^*ing know-it-all web designers! What a terrible site. I'll have to tell him, one of my close friend designed the site :-) You can tell him from me that it's shit. I hate the dumbing down that goes on, that forces the viewer to take courses of actions with little control over the way back. The pics are not much better.
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/11/05, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed: http://www.nickbrandt.com/ f*(%^^*ing know-it-all web designers! What a terrible site. I'll have to tell him, one of my close friend designed the site :-) You can tell him from me that it's shit. I hate the dumbing down that goes on, that forces the viewer to take courses of actions with little control over the way back. The pics are not much better. Other than that it's fine. Horrible usability: I couldn't see anything on the site because it uses Flash on the main page and JavaScript for navigation (both of these things will also insure that this site gets a very poor ranking in the search engines). The designer definitely needs to read www.webpagesthatsuck.com -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 11 Nov 2005 at 12:55, John Forbes wrote: Not entirely true, Mike. I saw a documentry featuring turdcams, and although the elephants did spot a couple of them, most survived. One of the best wild-life docs I've seen. If it's the doco I saw the elephants cottoned on to the camera lark and started started booting it about like a football. Good stuff. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
for me, getting past the documentation shot means either an action shot at a certain moment, or waiting for an unusual pose. both require timing, and both frequently have very limited repeatability. that means that if the camera isn't ready for any reason, the shot is gone forever. many things you can expect and time, but there are also many things that aren't expected, and a camera with a slow write isn't going to cut it. i'm selective too, but with a fast camera, i am aiming for the very hard to time moments like the bird with its wings spread pecking at the fruit on the tree. it's tricky enough to time and it happens quickly enough that 7 or 8 frames can go by in that many seconds as i try to catch the moment when the beak just crushes the berry. Herb... - Original Message - From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 10:47 AM Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Not interested. As I stated in a previous post I'm tying to get past the documentation shot. I think for some people, new to in- field animal shots, just capturing photographically, animals in the wild, is a real hoot. I've pretty much done that with the animals in Denali I seek to move to the next level, so I am selective in what I capture - does this cause me to miss some action ? Occasionally yes. Do I still follow an animal with my lens during a sequence? Sure. I just try to anticipate the right moment to press the release.
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
In the UK, the D now sells for the same price as the DS. Your argument no longer applies, in this country at least. John On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 23:58:55 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nor do I but the question is would you buy another? I wouldn't. Nor I. Not because I am patently unhappy with it. The *ist D was all there was for Pentax users when it came out. While I dislike the, IMO, reduced feature sets of the D(eviants), I'm not sure the *ist D is worth a time and a half or twice as much as them at this point in the game. If I was set on buying a Pentax DSLR, I would hold off until there is an *ist D successor, if one is forthcoming. If you can convince a reseller to sell you an *ist D at a bargain basement price, maybe. Tom C. -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Not arguing John. The fact still is that the *ist D is almost two years old, with some here believing or hoping it's replacement is forthcoming. If I couldn't wait, I'd buy the D at a low price. Otherwise I'd wait. Does it sell at the same price everywhere or just one particular retailer? Tom C. From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:19:08 - In the UK, the D now sells for the same price as the DS. Your argument no longer applies, in this country at least. John On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 23:58:55 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nor do I but the question is would you buy another? I wouldn't. Nor I. Not because I am patently unhappy with it. The *ist D was all there was for Pentax users when it came out. While I dislike the, IMO, reduced feature sets of the D(eviants), I'm not sure the *ist D is worth a time and a half or twice as much as them at this point in the game. If I was set on buying a Pentax DSLR, I would hold off until there is an *ist D successor, if one is forthcoming. If you can convince a reseller to sell you an *ist D at a bargain basement price, maybe. Tom C. -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
It's not advertised much, but for the last nine months the D has generally been sold for the same price as the DS in the UK. I bought a second D a few months ago because the price had come down so much, and I believe that it's successor, if it offers substantial improvements, will be substantially more expensive. As for the improvements, IS is not an issue for me, and I find that the admittedly small buffer is seldom a problem in practice. I could have bought the faster DS as a second camera, but considered the benefit of having two identical cameras outweighed the benefit of a bigger buffer. These are all personal criteria, and everyone is different. However, whilst I accept that IS and speed are important for some photogrpahers, I believe that most people will find any of the Pentax DSLRs to be quite satisfactory, even if they have K or M lenses. Please note I said most people. Those who are waiting and waiting are, in my view, missing out on two things. The first is that it costs nothing to press the shutter. This encourages experimentation and lowers the cost of photography (unless somebody is silly enough to use a digital like a film camera, and prints every picture he takes). The second is that there is a big learning curve with digital picture processing, and the sooner you start the better. There is a lot of noise on the internet from those who think the Pentax DSLRs aren't right for them. That's fine, but for every complainant, there are hundreds of people happily taking photographs. The noise makes it hard to put the matter into perspective, and that's why I sometimes get drawn into arguments on the subject. :-) Just trying to redress the balance! John On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:33:39 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not arguing John. The fact still is that the *ist D is almost two years old, with some here believing or hoping it's replacement is forthcoming. If I couldn't wait, I'd buy the D at a low price. Otherwise I'd wait. Does it sell at the same price everywhere or just one particular retailer? Tom C. From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:19:08 - In the UK, the D now sells for the same price as the DS. Your argument no longer applies, in this country at least. John On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 23:58:55 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nor do I but the question is would you buy another? I wouldn't. Nor I. Not because I am patently unhappy with it. The *ist D was all there was for Pentax users when it came out. While I dislike the, IMO, reduced feature sets of the D(eviants), I'm not sure the *ist D is worth a time and a half or twice as much as them at this point in the game. If I was set on buying a Pentax DSLR, I would hold off until there is an *ist D successor, if one is forthcoming. If you can convince a reseller to sell you an *ist D at a bargain basement price, maybe. Tom C. -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 11/10/05, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not arguing John. snip Yes you are! -frank g -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Doug Franklin wrote: On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 22:26:31 +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: Fiddely CF card removal. You know, people have commented on this repeatedly, and I just don't get it. Once I found the eject button at the bottom of the CF card well, removal hasn't been a problem at all. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ Ditto. And I'd take it over the DS's SD Card Launcher. -Adam
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Panos aside, any action shots, deer running through the forest for example can quickly fill the buffer. I shot similar moving sequences of caribou, moose, bear, beaver ptarmigan during my last trip to Denali in 04 and IIRC the buffer was only a very few times an issue. I may be more selective in what I shoot. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? I could see it being a limitation at key/critical moments, maybe not often... If one is taking a panorama at sunrise or sunset, during a fast moving storm, times when the light is changing fast... One buffer of shots may be enough to capture it, but it would be nice to have enough speed to bracket and get a 2nd or 3rd chance at it before the opportunity is gone. It happened to me in Alaska, where there was a very wide scene... I had just taken 2 or 3 shots before I was concentrating on the panorama around me, started shooting the panorama, and dead in the water half way through waiting to be able to fire again. Not the end of the world of course, and not a reason to NOT purchase. It was actually more difficult with film and needing to change rolls. We're getting a little bit spoiled, it seems. :) Tom C. From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 20:37:06 -0500 I guess its implied that you're trying to capture images faster than the buffer will allow. I very seldom run up against that limitation, especially with panos. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? On 9 Nov 2005 at 19:06, Kenneth Waller wrote: Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Not aware of an issue with panos. What did I miss? It's all to do with the total angle of view required vs the lenses angle view vs the dynamics of the subject, simple really. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
The proximity of the door to the strap attachment is a concern, but once you realise the strap must be up away from the door, it becomes a non issue. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 22:26:31 +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: Fiddely CF card removal. You know, people have commented on this repeatedly, and I just don't get it. Once I found the eject button at the bottom of the CF card well, removal hasn't been a problem at all. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On Nov 9, 2005, at 9:29 PM, Tom C wrote: The reasons not to buy an *ist D are pretty simple, IMO. 1. It's now a hair's breadth away from being a two year old camera. I've owned my Canon 10D for over two years now and it was 9 months old in the field when I bought it. It still takes superb photographs. It has a larger buffer than the D, but is probably even slower on write operations. it has NEVER been a problem to me, either in action, sports, still or panoramic photography. If the 10D were still in production, and I hadn't gone to the Pentax line, I'd have no problems buying a second 10D body. The bottom line is that a camera is a tool. The Pentax *ist D/DS/DS2/ DL are all good cameras that serve the job well. If the tool does the job you want, it is a good tool. If it is inadequate to your job, you need a different one. Whether another make is pummeling them on features is inconsequential since I haven't seen any evidence to prove that the image quality is substantially different. If the camera does the job you want, costs what you want to pay, and will survive in use for the period of time that it ought to ... and 5-10 years seems a reasonable lifespan for a camera that's actually used as it ought to be ... I count their value as how much use I get out of them, not how long I own them anyway. I suspect both the DS bodies I own will last that long, and provide good value as well. Godfrey
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
It lists for a lot higher in the US but you can find them on line for less than the DS. (Not at the the big boys like KEH, BH and Adorama though). John Forbes wrote: In the UK, the D now sells for the same price as the DS. Your argument no longer applies, in this country at least. John On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 23:58:55 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nor do I but the question is would you buy another? I wouldn't. Nor I. Not because I am patently unhappy with it. The *ist D was all there was for Pentax users when it came out. While I dislike the, IMO, reduced feature sets of the D(eviants), I'm not sure the *ist D is worth a time and a half or twice as much as them at this point in the game. If I was set on buying a Pentax DSLR, I would hold off until there is an *ist D successor, if one is forthcoming. If you can convince a reseller to sell you an *ist D at a bargain basement price, maybe. Tom C. -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 11/10/05, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ditto. And I'd take it over the DS's SD Card Launcher. -Adam I have no idea how the *istD behaves, but my DS will eject the SD card (a Sandisk Ultra II - 1GB) exactly the right amount, not a mm more or less. It won't drop to the floor and it's not difficult at all to remove. -- Best regards, Alex Sarbu
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On Nov 10, 2005, at 11:31, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote: On 11/10/05, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ditto. And I'd take it over the DS's SD Card Launcher. -Adam I have no idea how the *istD behaves, but my DS will eject the SD card (a Sandisk Ultra II - 1GB) exactly the right amount, not a mm more or less. It won't drop to the floor and it's not difficult at all to remove. I have noticed the same thing - people talk about the DS launching the card across the room... but maybe it's my off-brand card with bad tolerances or something, but there is enough friction to the fitting that it just comes out a few mm's and I can grab the fingernail nick and pull it out the rest of the way without any fuss. Huh. Sure enough - the 64mb Lexar card from my Palmpilot can get shot all the way across my cubicle from my camera - but my Kingmax 60x 1gig card that I use in the DS is just a shade wider, and does not eject quite so enthusiastically. -Charles -- Charles Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] The second is that there is a big learning curve with digital picture processing, and the sooner you start the better. Totally agree. Tom C.
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
I don't understand this business of the card. The card I have (Kingston) goes in and comes out perfectly well. I expected not to be able to get hold of it -- from reading messages of a couple of years ago. Don Charles Robinson wrote: On Nov 10, 2005, at 11:31, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote: On 11/10/05, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ditto. And I'd take it over the DS's SD Card Launcher. -Adam I have no idea how the *istD behaves, but my DS will eject the SD card (a Sandisk Ultra II - 1GB) exactly the right amount, not a mm more or less. It won't drop to the floor and it's not difficult at all to remove. I have noticed the same thing - people talk about the DS launching the card across the room... but maybe it's my off-brand card with bad tolerances or something, but there is enough friction to the fitting that it just comes out a few mm's and I can grab the fingernail nick and pull it out the rest of the way without any fuss. Huh. Sure enough - the 64mb Lexar card from my Palmpilot can get shot all the way across my cubicle from my camera - but my Kingmax 60x 1gig card that I use in the DS is just a shade wider, and does not eject quite so enthusiastically. -Charles -- Charles Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org --No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.8/165 - Release Date: 09/11/2005 -- Dr E D F Williams ___ http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams See feature: The Cement Company from Hell Updated: Photomicro Link -- 18 05 2005
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Really Ken? When an animal is running through undergrowth and towards trees and cover where there will be no more opportunity to take the shot you are more selective? I'm talking about a situation where you have probably at most 15 - 20 seconds to capture the animal . The buffer quite easily fills in that time frame. Nice backhand, BTW. Tom C. From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:49:41 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Panos aside, any action shots, deer running through the forest for example can quickly fill the buffer. I shot similar moving sequences of caribou, moose, bear, beaver ptarmigan during my last trip to Denali in 04 and IIRC the buffer was only a very few times an issue. I may be more selective in what I shoot. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? I could see it being a limitation at key/critical moments, maybe not often... If one is taking a panorama at sunrise or sunset, during a fast moving storm, times when the light is changing fast... One buffer of shots may be enough to capture it, but it would be nice to have enough speed to bracket and get a 2nd or 3rd chance at it before the opportunity is gone. It happened to me in Alaska, where there was a very wide scene... I had just taken 2 or 3 shots before I was concentrating on the panorama around me, started shooting the panorama, and dead in the water half way through waiting to be able to fire again. Not the end of the world of course, and not a reason to NOT purchase. It was actually more difficult with film and needing to change rolls. We're getting a little bit spoiled, it seems. :) Tom C. From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 20:37:06 -0500 I guess its implied that you're trying to capture images faster than the buffer will allow. I very seldom run up against that limitation, especially with panos. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? On 9 Nov 2005 at 19:06, Kenneth Waller wrote: Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Not aware of an issue with panos. What did I miss? It's all to do with the total angle of view required vs the lenses angle view vs the dynamics of the subject, simple really. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
You should read this month's Lenswork interview with Nick Grant regarding his wildlife photos from Africa. He uses a Pentax 6x7 camera and gets in CLOSE. Patience and a tolerance for letting the world do as it might is essential. His wildlife photos are the only ones I've seen in recent years that really do the subject justice, to my eye. All these fit a 600mm telephoto and bang a hundred shots off in 10 seconds pictures are boring. His technique allows the intimate expression of the animals to surface. Godfrey
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Try a Microdrive. They're just a little bit fatter than a CF card - eonugh so that you will occasionally need to give the unit a good tug to remove it. That's almost impossible with the D - the door gets in the way. On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 07:56:37PM +0200, Don Williams wrote: I don't understand this business of the card. The card I have (Kingston) goes in and comes out perfectly well. I expected not to be able to get hold of it -- from reading messages of a couple of years ago. Don Charles Robinson wrote: On Nov 10, 2005, at 11:31, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote: On 11/10/05, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ditto. And I'd take it over the DS's SD Card Launcher. -Adam I have no idea how the *istD behaves, but my DS will eject the SD card (a Sandisk Ultra II - 1GB) exactly the right amount, not a mm more or less. It won't drop to the floor and it's not difficult at all to remove. I have noticed the same thing - people talk about the DS launching the card across the room... but maybe it's my off-brand card with bad tolerances or something, but there is enough friction to the fitting that it just comes out a few mm's and I can grab the fingernail nick and pull it out the rest of the way without any fuss. Huh. Sure enough - the 64mb Lexar card from my Palmpilot can get shot all the way across my cubicle from my camera - but my Kingmax 60x 1gig card that I use in the DS is just a shade wider, and does not eject quite so enthusiastically. -Charles -- Charles Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org --No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.8/165 - Release Date: 09/11/2005 -- Dr E D F Williams ___ http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams See feature: The Cement Company from Hell Updated: Photomicro Link -- 18 05 2005
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Tom, I'm not trying to be uppity here. I'm not implying that you do, but I don't hold the release down fire away. I've done that in the past I've gotten good documentary/stock shots of alot of animals in the wild. I'm trying to move on capture the unusual animal pose/expression/interaction. I won't shoot just because I see a bear/moose/beaver/etc. During my first few trips to Alaska I did. Once you've got the animal shot you've always wanted you realize the only way to improve on that shot is to capture it doing something different (a bear scratching his back on a tree/ the interaction of the animal with others etc) Go ahead shoot any way you like, I'm just relaying my experience with the *ist D in the field. I'm lobing this one back into your court VBG Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Really Ken? When an animal is running through undergrowth and towards trees and cover where there will be no more opportunity to take the shot you are more selective? I'm talking about a situation where you have probably at most 15 - 20 seconds to capture the animal . The buffer quite easily fills in that time frame. Nice backhand, BTW. Tom C. From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:49:41 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Panos aside, any action shots, deer running through the forest for example can quickly fill the buffer. I shot similar moving sequences of caribou, moose, bear, beaver ptarmigan during my last trip to Denali in 04 and IIRC the buffer was only a very few times an issue. I may be more selective in what I shoot. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? I could see it being a limitation at key/critical moments, maybe not often... If one is taking a panorama at sunrise or sunset, during a fast moving storm, times when the light is changing fast... One buffer of shots may be enough to capture it, but it would be nice to have enough speed to bracket and get a 2nd or 3rd chance at it before the opportunity is gone. It happened to me in Alaska, where there was a very wide scene... I had just taken 2 or 3 shots before I was concentrating on the panorama around me, started shooting the panorama, and dead in the water half way through waiting to be able to fire again. Not the end of the world of course, and not a reason to NOT purchase. It was actually more difficult with film and needing to change rolls. We're getting a little bit spoiled, it seems. :) Tom C. From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 20:37:06 -0500 I guess its implied that you're trying to capture images faster than the buffer will allow. I very seldom run up against that limitation, especially with panos. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? On 9 Nov 2005 at 19:06, Kenneth Waller wrote: Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Not aware of an issue with panos. What did I miss? It's all to do with the total angle of view required vs the lenses angle view vs the dynamics of the subject, simple really. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
All these fit a 600mm telephoto and bang a hundred shots off in 10 seconds pictures are boring. His technique allows the intimate expression of the animals to surface. Some of what I was trying to relate in a just posted reply. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? You should read this month's Lenswork interview with Nick Grant regarding his wildlife photos from Africa. He uses a Pentax 6x7 camera and gets in CLOSE. Patience and a tolerance for letting the world do as it might is essential. His wildlife photos are the only ones I've seen in recent years that really do the subject justice, to my eye. All these fit a 600mm telephoto and bang a hundred shots off in 10 seconds pictures are boring. His technique allows the intimate expression of the animals to surface. Godfrey PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
- Original Message - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] You should read this month's Lenswork interview with Nick Grant regarding his wildlife photos from Africa. He uses a Pentax 6x7 camera and gets in CLOSE. Patience and a tolerance for letting the world do as it might is essential. His wildlife photos are the only ones I've seen in recent years that really do the subject justice, to my eye. All these fit a 600mm telephoto and bang a hundred shots off in 10 seconds pictures are boring. His technique allows the intimate expression of the animals to surface. So I had to check out Nick Grant.. errr Brandt to see what he's all about. http://www.nickbrandt.com/ I agree with you about getting close to the subjects and I try to do this in my own nature (bird) photography. After looking at Brandt's photos, I must say that you and I have VERY different ideas about photography and doing the subjects justice I don't like his technique at all. I hate the soft edges; it reminds me of glamour photos with a soft filter/lens. The soft focus (or post processing; whatever it is) ruins otherwise very nice closeups/portraits. I DO like the framing and composition of his wider shots. In my opinion he is trying too hard to make his photos look vintage and that bothers me; it isn't genuine and it makes it look like he is trying to be something that he is not. Except for the wide shots showing the animals and the sweeping vistas of their environment, it doesn't (in my opinion) do them any justice. Christian
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Getting close can harm the animals. It may give away their location to predators or prey, cause stress, disrupt feeding and lead to abandonment of nests or young. - Original Message - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] You should read this month's Lenswork interview with Nick Grant regarding his wildlife photos from Africa. He uses a Pentax 6x7 camera and gets in CLOSE. Patience and a tolerance for letting the world do as it might is essential. His wildlife photos are the only ones I've seen in recent years that really do the subject justice, to my eye. All these fit a 600mm telephoto and bang a hundred shots off in 10 seconds pictures are boring. His technique allows the intimate expression of the animals to surface. So I had to check out Nick Grant.. errr Brandt to see what he's all about. http://www.nickbrandt.com/ I agree with you about getting close to the subjects and I try to do this in my own nature (bird) photography. After looking at Brandt's photos, I must say that you and I have VERY different ideas about photography and doing the subjects justice I don't like his technique at all. I hate the soft edges; it reminds me of glamour photos with a soft filter/lens. The soft focus (or post processing; whatever it is) ruins otherwise very nice closeups/portraits. I DO like the framing and composition of his wider shots. In my opinion he is trying too hard to make his photos look vintage and that bothers me; it isn't genuine and it makes it look like he is trying to be something that he is not. Except for the wide shots showing the animals and the sweeping vistas of their environment, it doesn't (in my opinion) do them any justice. Christian
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
- Original Message - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? You should read this month's Lenswork interview with Nick Grant regarding his wildlife photos from Africa. He uses a Pentax 6x7 camera and gets in CLOSE. Patience and a tolerance for letting the world do as it might is essential. His wildlife photos are the only ones I've seen in recent years that really do the subject justice, to my eye. All these fit a 600mm telephoto and bang a hundred shots off in 10 seconds pictures are boring. His technique allows the intimate expression of the animals to surface. For every photographer who does this successfully, there are more than likely dozens who are only successful in scaring the animals off their nests, or away from their cubs or away from their feeding places. It's all very well and good to use such an arguement in a theoretical debate, but in practice, most of these types of photographers are doing more harm to their subjects than their *intimate expressions* will ever be worth as photographs. William Robb
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tom, I'm not trying to be uppity here. I'm not implying that you do, but I don't hold the release down fire away. I've done that in the past I've gotten good documentary/stock shots of alot of animals in the wild. I'm trying to move on capture the unusual animal pose/expression/interaction. I won't shoot just because I see a bear/moose/beaver/etc. During my first few trips to Alaska I did. Once you've got the animal shot you've always wanted you realize the only way to improve on that shot is to capture it doing something different (a bear scratching his back on a tree/ the interaction of the animal with others etc) Go ahead shoot any way you like, I'm just relaying my experience with the *ist D in the field. It all depends on the situation Ken. My shooting style changes with the situation I'm presented with (as I'm sure yours must as well). If the subject is relatively stationary, there's plenty of time to think more about the shot. If all of the sudden an opportunity appears and the subject is moving quickly and there is only a few seconds to capture it, I'll fire rapidly. After all, that's why the continuous AF/shutter release capability was built into the camera. To the point of the topic... Having the ability to rapid fire and only take 7 shots... is sort of like using a film camera with a winder and starting to shoot at the end of the roll. Tom C. -Original Message- From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Really Ken? When an animal is running through undergrowth and towards trees and cover where there will be no more opportunity to take the shot you are more selective? I'm talking about a situation where you have probably at most 15 - 20 seconds to capture the animal . The buffer quite easily fills in that time frame. Nice backhand, BTW. Tom C. From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:49:41 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Panos aside, any action shots, deer running through the forest for example can quickly fill the buffer. I shot similar moving sequences of caribou, moose, bear, beaver ptarmigan during my last trip to Denali in 04 and IIRC the buffer was only a very few times an issue. I may be more selective in what I shoot. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? I could see it being a limitation at key/critical moments, maybe not often... If one is taking a panorama at sunrise or sunset, during a fast moving storm, times when the light is changing fast... One buffer of shots may be enough to capture it, but it would be nice to have enough speed to bracket and get a 2nd or 3rd chance at it before the opportunity is gone. It happened to me in Alaska, where there was a very wide scene... I had just taken 2 or 3 shots before I was concentrating on the panorama around me, started shooting the panorama, and dead in the water half way through waiting to be able to fire again. Not the end of the world of course, and not a reason to NOT purchase. It was actually more difficult with film and needing to change rolls. We're getting a little bit spoiled, it seems. :) Tom C. From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 20:37:06 -0500 I guess its implied that you're trying to capture images faster than the buffer will allow. I very seldom run up against that limitation, especially with panos. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? On 9 Nov 2005 at 19:06, Kenneth Waller wrote: Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Not aware of an issue with panos. What did I miss? It's all to do with the total angle of view required vs the lenses angle view vs the dynamics of the subject, simple really. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
- Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? It all depends on the situation Ken. My shooting style changes with the situation I'm presented with (as I'm sure yours must as well). If the subject is relatively stationary, there's plenty of time to think more about the shot. If all of the sudden an opportunity appears and the subject is moving quickly and there is only a few seconds to capture it, I'll fire rapidly. After all, that's why the continuous AF/shutter release capability was built into the camera. To the point of the topic... Having the ability to rapid fire and only take 7 shots... is sort of like using a film camera with a winder and starting to shoot at the end of the roll. Back when I had a camera with a high speed drive, I discovered that pushing the shutter button and praying was an excellent way to shoot a lot of film with little of worth to show for it. I always managed to get a picture just before, or just after what I actually wanted, almost never capturing the exact moment when the subject presented itself at it's best. I have found this to be true with auto racing, motorcycle racing, dogsports and such disparate people sports as fencing, football, baseball, track and field, and soccer. While i haven't done a lot of wildlife photography, I believe the decisive moment method is probably the best one. I have found a low speed drive, perhaps a frame or two a second is useful, but that is more as an electric thumb than as a drive. When I am shooting amateur models, it is nice to be able to shoot more than six frames a minute, and I am more interested in a bigger buffer, higher write speed for that reason. William Robb
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:27:04 -0600 - Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? It all depends on the situation Ken. My shooting style changes with the situation I'm presented with (as I'm sure yours must as well). If the subject is relatively stationary, there's plenty of time to think more about the shot. If all of the sudden an opportunity appears and the subject is moving quickly and there is only a few seconds to capture it, I'll fire rapidly. After all, that's why the continuous AF/shutter release capability was built into the camera. To the point of the topic... Having the ability to rapid fire and only take 7 shots... is sort of like using a film camera with a winder and starting to shoot at the end of the roll. Back when I had a camera with a high speed drive, I discovered that pushing the shutter button and praying was an excellent way to shoot a lot of film with little of worth to show for it. I always managed to get a picture just before, or just after what I actually wanted, almost never capturing the exact moment when the subject presented itself at it's best. I have found this to be true with auto racing, motorcycle racing, dogsports and such disparate people sports as fencing, football, baseball, track and field, and soccer. While i haven't done a lot of wildlife photography, I believe the decisive moment method is probably the best one. I have found a low speed drive, perhaps a frame or two a second is useful, but that is more as an electric thumb than as a drive. When I am shooting amateur models, it is nice to be able to shoot more than six frames a minute, and I am more interested in a bigger buffer, higher write speed for that reason. William Robb Yes. I didn't mean to imply I just hold the shutter release down. Even a shot a second or every two seconds will quickly put one in a wait and watch state. Tom C.
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
- Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Yes. I didn't mean to imply I just hold the shutter release down. Even a shot a second or every two seconds will quickly put one in a wait and watch state. There is a benefit to the istD's buffer. When I was shooting studio for the AOV calender, I found myself quite often standing talking to a pretty and almost naked girl while waiting for the light to go out. It's not all bad. William Robb
RE: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
This I don't understand. Why waiting for the light to go out when talking to pretty and almost naked girls? You don't see them without light. Ah, now I do understand. You are kind of shy. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy) -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10. november 2005 20:47 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? - Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Yes. I didn't mean to imply I just hold the shutter release down. Even a shot a second or every two seconds will quickly put one in a wait and watch state. There is a benefit to the istD's buffer. When I was shooting studio for the AOV calender, I found myself quite often standing talking to a pretty and almost naked girl while waiting for the light to go out. It's not all bad. William Robb
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Tim, I think he's talking about das blinkenlight on the D, which indicates when it's writing to flash. -Adam Tim Øsleby wrote: This I don't understand. Why waiting for the light to go out when talking to pretty and almost naked girls? You don't see them without light. Ah, now I do understand. You are kind of shy. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy) -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10. november 2005 20:47 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? - Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Yes. I didn't mean to imply I just hold the shutter release down. Even a shot a second or every two seconds will quickly put one in a wait and watch state. There is a benefit to the istD's buffer. When I was shooting studio for the AOV calender, I found myself quite often standing talking to a pretty and almost naked girl while waiting for the light to go out. It's not all bad. William Robb
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
- Original Message - From: Tim Øsleby Subject: RE: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? This I don't understand. Why waiting for the light to go out when talking to pretty and almost naked girls? You don't see them without light. Ah, now I do understand. You are kind of shy. Think cameras, Tim. William Robb
RE: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Blinking light? Like in red light districk? Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy) -Original Message- From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10. november 2005 21:38 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Tim, I think he's talking about das blinkenlight on the D, which indicates when it's writing to flash. -Adam Tim Øsleby wrote: This I don't understand. Why waiting for the light to go out when talking to pretty and almost naked girls? You don't see them without light. Ah, now I do understand. You are kind of shy. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy) -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10. november 2005 20:47 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? - Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Yes. I didn't mean to imply I just hold the shutter release down. Even a shot a second or every two seconds will quickly put one in a wait and watch state. There is a benefit to the istD's buffer. When I was shooting studio for the AOV calender, I found myself quite often standing talking to a pretty and almost naked girl while waiting for the light to go out. It's not all bad. William Robb
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 10 Nov 2005 at 13:47, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Yes. I didn't mean to imply I just hold the shutter release down. Even a shot a second or every two seconds will quickly put one in a wait and watch state. There is a benefit to the istD's buffer. When I was shooting studio for the AOV calender, I found myself quite often standing talking to a pretty and almost naked girl while waiting for the light to go out. It's not all bad. Yes it does depend on the situation, try standing on a cliff top in the howling wind trying to shield the camera from the rain as the little orange light flickers away whilst shooting a few pano sequences. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 10 Nov 2005 at 13:34, John Francis wrote: Try a Microdrive. They're just a little bit fatter than a CF card - eonugh so that you will occasionally need to give the unit a good tug to remove it. That's almost impossible with the D - the door gets in the way. I guess we're just dreaming John. In explaining the responses I see here can only I use the analogy of a becoming familiar with a vehicle that has poor ergonomics. Firstly it feels awkward then after years of driving such a vehicle you get quite used to it, it feels quite normal. But when you later get into a well designed vehicle again you wonder how the heck you put up with the other crap. I had a camera with well designed CF card access, initially the *ist D seemed a very poor design and was irritating until I worked out work-arounds. Now I'm used to it, hopefully what comes next will be a better design but none of this changes the fact that the *ist D card access is an inherently poor design. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
- Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? I had a camera with well designed CF card access, initially the *ist D seemed a very poor design and was irritating until I worked out work-arounds. Now I'm used to it, hopefully what comes next will be a better design but none of this changes the fact that the *ist D card access is an inherently poor design. Even if they had put the slot in backwards it would have been an improvement. William Robb
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? I had a camera with well designed CF card access, initially the *ist D seemed a very poor design and was irritating until I worked out work-arounds. Now I'm used to it, hopefully what comes next will be a better design but none of this changes the fact that the *ist D card access is an inherently poor design. Even if they had put the slot in backwards it would have been an improvement. William Robb Guess I must be wierd that way. While I agree that flipping the slot would be an improvement, I've always liked the slot in the D. It's about perfect for me, the only real issue is the strap location. -Adam
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 10 Nov 2005 at 18:31, Adam Maas wrote: Guess I must be wierd that way. While I agree that flipping the slot would be an improvement, I've always liked the slot in the D. It's about perfect for me, the only real issue is the strap location. I guess so When using a stiff card the card pops out of the slot lower than the position of the release button at rest, this means it protrudes no more than 5mm. Given the fact that the distance between the rear of the card and the slot recess is no more than 5mm deep (in the recess provided by the cut-out into the battery container) you'd need pretty slim fingers to be able to pick it out. I've had to fit unsightly pull tabs to my cards so that I can remove them. On my old Oly E10 I simply flipped the card door open (the strap was still potentially in the way but the type of attachment made it much easier to move out of the way) pushed the button and casually gripped the edges of the protruding and un-obscured card. Simple really, check some review site a see what I mean. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
- Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? I've had to fit unsightly pull tabs to my cards so that I can remove them. On my old Oly E10 I simply flipped the card door open (the strap was still potentially in the way but the type of attachment made it much easier to move out of the way) pushed the button and casually gripped the edges of the protruding and un-obscured card. Simple really, check some review site a see what I mean. Maybe a dumb idea, but could a person shave a tight card a bit to make it more easily removed? William Robb
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
- Original Message - From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Guess I must be wierd that way. While I agree that flipping the slot would be an improvement, I've always liked the slot in the D. It's about perfect for me, the only real issue is the strap location. That is the problem. I just don't know where else they could put it and keep the compact body size. William Robb
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
for certain types of action, you don't have to shoot quick bursts, but is that a reflection of knowing the camera's limits and not trying to exceed them, or because you simply aren't interested? i can imagine a picture sequence of spawning salmon leaping a waterfall where you might want to capture a leap and a failure from beginning to end. one picture in the middle isn't the same impact as 10 or 15 in a row. think of WR's posted sample of an adult bald eagle attacking and snatching a fish from a juvenile. one image might catch the peak of the action, but a sequence can be more powerful in telling a story. Herb - Original Message - From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 9:49 AM Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? I shot similar moving sequences of caribou, moose, bear, beaver ptarmigan during my last trip to Denali in 04 and IIRC the buffer was only a very few times an issue. I may be more selective in what I shoot.
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 10 Nov 2005 at 21:21, Herb Chong wrote: for certain types of action, you don't have to shoot quick bursts, but is that a reflection of knowing the camera's limits and not trying to exceed them, or because you simply aren't interested? i can imagine a picture sequence of spawning salmon leaping a waterfall where you might want to capture a leap and a failure from beginning to end. one picture in the middle isn't the same impact as 10 or 15 in a row. think of WR's posted sample of an adult bald eagle attacking and snatching a fish from a juvenile. one image might catch the peak of the action, but a sequence can be more powerful in telling a story. http://www.oceanwideimages.com.au/categories.asp?cID=112p=2 Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On Nov 11, 2005, at 7:52 AM, Christian wrote: So I had to check out Nick Grant.. errr Brandt to see what he's all about. http://www.nickbrandt.com/ f*(%^^*ing know-it-all web designers! What a terrible site. Nice photos though. I'd love to see the cheetah one in colour. - Dave (a little irritable due to a 30C day and having a cold in Summer)
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 11 Nov 2005 at 17:42, David Mann wrote: On Nov 11, 2005, at 7:52 AM, Christian wrote: So I had to check out Nick Grant.. errr Brandt to see what he's all about. http://www.nickbrandt.com/ f*(%^^*ing know-it-all web designers! What a terrible site. I'll have to tell him, one of my close friend designed the site :-) He's a MMFlash fan. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On Nov 10, 2005, at 10:52 AM, Christian wrote: You should read this month's Lenswork interview with Nick Grant regarding his wildlife photos from Africa. He uses a Pentax 6x7 camera and gets in CLOSE. Patience and a tolerance for letting the world do as it might is essential. His wildlife photos are the only ones I've seen in recent years that really do the subject justice, to my eye. All these fit a 600mm telephoto and bang a hundred shots off in 10 seconds pictures are boring. His technique allows the intimate expression of the animals to surface. So I had to check out Nick Grant.. errr Brandt to see what he's all about. http://www.nickbrandt.com/ Sorry about the misspelling. I agree with you about getting close to the subjects and I try to do this in my own nature (bird) photography. After looking at Brandt's photos, I must say that you and I have VERY different ideas about photography and doing the subjects justice I don't like his technique at all. I hate the soft edges; it reminds me of glamour photos with a soft filter/lens. The soft focus (or post processing; whatever it is) ruins otherwise very nice closeups/ portraits. I DO like the framing and composition of his wider shots. In my opinion he is trying too hard to make his photos look vintage and that bothers me; it isn't genuine and it makes it look like he is trying to be something that he is not. Except for the wide shots showing the animals and the sweeping vistas of their environment, it doesn't (in my opinion) do them any justice. Yes, we have very different ideas about photographic aesthetics. I like the romantic/sensual feel he's put into them, they speak mystery and 'life' to me, a certain level of abstraction and art rather than just documentary. The are plenty of straight wildlife photos that document the reality very well ... Like sunsets and landscapes, very few of them hold my interest for more than a moment or two. Sometimes his vignetting is a bit heavy-handed, I agree, but overall I like the series a lot. The printed images in Lenswork are much nicer than these web resolution thumbnails, the book should be even better. The thumbnails on that site are barely sharp enough to be worth looking at. Godfrey
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Rob Studdert wrote: On 11 Nov 2005 at 17:42, David Mann wrote: On Nov 11, 2005, at 7:52 AM, Christian wrote: So I had to check out Nick Grant.. errr Brandt to see what he's all about. http://www.nickbrandt.com/ f*(%^^*ing know-it-all web designers! What a terrible site. I'll have to tell him, one of my close friend designed the site :-) He's a MMFlash fan. Rob Studdert Apart from the Pop-up window, the use of flash is well done. But the Pop-up is bloody annoying, and since the site is pretty much contained in it, Evil Rude as well. Great shots. Nick Brandt got a writeup in Black White Photography this month, so I'd seen several of the shots on here. It's a nicer take on Wildlife shots than most I've seen (the vast majority of Wildlife Work does nothing for me) -Adam
SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Small buffer, Only 5 images in a bust. Then wait 37 sec's for the next 5 shots or 7 sec's for the next single shot: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/469145/ Rather slow AF in low light, compared to the competition. Fiddely CF card removal. Crappy CF card door right under your right thumb. Not full K and M lens support (no aperture simulator). Rather much image noise at ISO 800-3200. Inaccurate TTL flash metering. Very limited pro lens options (F2.8 or better). Some third party lenses are not available for Pentax (Tamron 200-500mm AF, for one) No imediate histogram available (you'll need three clicks). No over exposure warning in LCD. No Image Stabilizing facilitees and no USM available. No RAW+JPEG avaliable Only 6 Mp Expensive Not a camera for a pro (sports or action) shooter. Pros: Other than that it's a nice, quite small camera. Well built, reliable and with an excellent user interface in general (no useless shooting modes for dummies - except for the green button). Utilizes (to some extend) 50 years old lenses. Very good for dedicated amatuers and freelancers, like me - on a limited budget and with many old lenses on the shelf. There's really not too much it can't do - if you have enough time and patience. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 9. november 2005 13:56 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Any reason not to buy a *istD? - Original Message - From: Ralf R. Radermacher Subject: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Just wondering... Since it shares the same sensor as it's less expensive siblings, you are paying a premium for what is primarily a nicer build quality. The istD really is a nicely assembled camera. Other than that, there are some trade-offs. The istD does a few things the others don't, and they do a few things the istD doesn't do. William Robb
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 9 Nov 2005 at 22:26, Jens Bladt wrote: Small buffer, Only 5 images in a bust. Then wait 37 sec's for the next 5 shots or 7 sec's for the next single shot: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/469145/ Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 08:44:53AM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: On 9 Nov 2005 at 22:26, Jens Bladt wrote: Small buffer, Only 5 images in a bust. Then wait 37 sec's for the next 5 shots or 7 sec's for the next single shot: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/469145/ Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Oddly enough, I've managed to use my D for (RAW) panoramas, and for motorsports action photography. I guess it's just as well that I didn't know the camera couldn't be used for such things. It could certainly be better for buffer size, write speed, and auto-focus performance (while I've got some great action shots, I've also got several near misses). But I don't regret having purchased the camera, even though I paid almost $2000 (US) for the camera and battery grip.
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
- Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Oddly enough, I've managed to use my D for (RAW) panoramas, and for motorsports action photography. I've tried some panos with mine. It can be done, but you have to be patient with the camera. I guess it's just as well that I didn't know the camera couldn't be used for such things. Did someone say that or are you hyperbolizing? It could certainly be better for buffer size, write speed, and auto-focus performance (while I've got some great action shots, I've also got several near misses). I suspect that was Rob's point. I know for a fact I have missed a number of pictures because of the small, slow buffer. But I don't regret having purchased the camera, even though I paid almost $2000 (US) for the camera and battery grip. Nor I, but this does not mean I don't see room for improvement. William Robb
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 9 Nov 2005 at 18:37, John Francis wrote: Oddly enough, I've managed to use my D for (RAW) panoramas, and for motorsports action photography. I guess it's just as well that I didn't know the camera couldn't be used for such things. I'm glad for you but let's face it there was no other choice at the time, if you wanted to shoot digital and use you current 35mm glass in a resonable manner the *ist D was it, the only choice. It could certainly be better for buffer size, write speed, and auto-focus performance (while I've got some great action shots, I've also got several near misses). And my misses are becoming more frequent due to the type of photography that I'm undertaking these days. But I don't regret having purchased the camera, even though I paid almost $2000 (US) for the camera and battery grip. Nor do I but the question is would you buy another? I wouldn't. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 9 Nov 2005 at 17:44, William Robb wrote: I suspect that was Rob's point. I know for a fact I have missed a number of pictures because of the small, slow buffer. It's like the fish that got away there's never proof, IOW a lost image can never be regained it's most painful for me when I'm, shooting concerts and panos, I never seem to need quite the buffer depth when shooting motor sports even crashes, a deeper buffer would be nice though. Specifically WRT pano shooing because there is no practical full frame fisheye solution for the Pentax DSLRs any immersive pano will require more than seven shots, so out the window goes any midst of the action photo options such as Springwood Foundation Day at http://4020.net/bmvr/#springfnd Now that's street photography :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nor do I but the question is would you buy another? I wouldn't. Nor I. Not because I am patently unhappy with it. The *ist D was all there was for Pentax users when it came out. While I dislike the, IMO, reduced feature sets of the D(eviants), I'm not sure the *ist D is worth a time and a half or twice as much as them at this point in the game. If I was set on buying a Pentax DSLR, I would hold off until there is an *ist D successor, if one is forthcoming. If you can convince a reseller to sell you an *ist D at a bargain basement price, maybe. Tom C.
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Not aware of an issue with panos. What did I miss? Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 6:44 PM Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? - Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Oddly enough, I've managed to use my D for (RAW) panoramas, and for motorsports action photography. I've tried some panos with mine. It can be done, but you have to be patient with the camera. I guess it's just as well that I didn't know the camera couldn't be used for such things. Did someone say that or are you hyperbolizing? It could certainly be better for buffer size, write speed, and auto-focus performance (while I've got some great action shots, I've also got several near misses). I suspect that was Rob's point. I know for a fact I have missed a number of pictures because of the small, slow buffer. But I don't regret having purchased the camera, even though I paid almost $2000 (US) for the camera and battery grip. Nor I, but this does not mean I don't see room for improvement. William Robb
RE: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
If they come out with something that has all the missing features that I want that arent in the *istD series cameras it would be damn near impossible to resist getting. As it is I am fence sitting at the moment...My position is well known, I want open aperture manual and open aperture AE with K/M lenses quite badly, as I literally have dozens of these lenses and I like to use them that way jco -Original Message- From: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 6:59 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nor do I but the question is would you buy another? I wouldn't. Nor I. Not because I am patently unhappy with it. The *ist D was all there was for Pentax users when it came out. While I dislike the, IMO, reduced feature sets of the D(eviants), I'm not sure the *ist D is worth a time and a half or twice as much as them at this point in the game. If I was set on buying a Pentax DSLR, I would hold off until there is an *ist D successor, if one is forthcoming. If you can convince a reseller to sell you an *ist D at a bargain basement price, maybe. Tom C.
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 9 Nov 2005 at 19:06, Kenneth Waller wrote: Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Not aware of an issue with panos. What did I miss? It's all to do with the total angle of view required vs the lenses angle view vs the dynamics of the subject, simple really. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 10:48:34AM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: On 9 Nov 2005 at 18:37, John Francis wrote: But I don't regret having purchased the camera, even though I paid almost $2000 (US) for the camera and battery grip. Nor do I but the question is would you buy another? I wouldn't. Ask me again in six months.
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 08:44:53AM +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: On 9 Nov 2005 at 22:26, Jens Bladt wrote: Small buffer, Only 5 images in a bust. Then wait 37 sec's for the next 5 shots or 7 sec's for the next single shot: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/469145/ Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Oddly enough, I've managed to use my D for (RAW) panoramas, and for motorsports action photography. Same here. With panos, the shooting speed limitation is trivial, in my experience. When I'm shooting a 21-frame 360-degree panorama (and I've done quite a few with this camera), I'm generally not trying to capture fast action ;-) The limitation is more significant with motorsports, but this can be minimized through some preparation and skill on the part of the photographer (though I realize these concepts are out of fashion these days). I guess it's just as well that I didn't know the camera couldn't be used for such things. It could certainly be better for buffer size, write speed, and auto-focus performance (while I've got some great action shots, I've also got several near misses). But I don't regret having purchased the camera, even though I paid almost $2000 (US) for the camera and battery grip. I concur on all the above points. The main reason I'm not champing at the bit for the next top-end Pentax DSLR is that the ist-D performs so well for me that I don't feel a pressing need for a replacement at the moment. I'll buy it when Pentax makes it (and I expect it'll become available next year just about the time I can afford it!) but I'll keep the ist-D. Oddly enough, despite the reputation for DSLR's rapid showing of age, I expect to be using the ist-D professionally for longer than either the PZ-1p or the MZ-S held the top spot in my arsenal. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
I guess its implied that you're trying to capture images faster than the buffer will allow. I very seldom run up against that limitation, especially with panos. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? On 9 Nov 2005 at 19:06, Kenneth Waller wrote: Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Not aware of an issue with panos. What did I miss? It's all to do with the total angle of view required vs the lenses angle view vs the dynamics of the subject, simple really. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On 9 Nov 2005 at 20:37, Kenneth Waller wrote: I guess its implied that you're trying to capture images faster than the buffer will allow. I very seldom run up against that limitation, especially with panos. Unfortunately I do regularly, particularly on subjects with a wide exposure range where I bracket therefore trebling the number of shots. When shooting in crowds (or with busy people in the scene) I make two or three exposures at the same position so that I can eliminate partial figures and when I'm shooting close to surf I need to be quick to minimize stitching problems due to the incoming waves. I shot 106 pano sequences during my last trip some failed due to the speed of limitations of the camera. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
I could see it being a limitation at key/critical moments, maybe not often... If one is taking a panorama at sunrise or sunset, during a fast moving storm, times when the light is changing fast... One buffer of shots may be enough to capture it, but it would be nice to have enough speed to bracket and get a 2nd or 3rd chance at it before the opportunity is gone. It happened to me in Alaska, where there was a very wide scene... I had just taken 2 or 3 shots before I was concentrating on the panorama around me, started shooting the panorama, and dead in the water half way through waiting to be able to fire again. Panos aside, any action shots, deer running through the forest for example can quickly fill the buffer. Not the end of the world of course, and not a reason to NOT purchase. It was actually more difficult with film and needing to change rolls. We're getting a little bit spoiled, it seems. :) Tom C. From: Kenneth Waller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 20:37:06 -0500 I guess its implied that you're trying to capture images faster than the buffer will allow. I very seldom run up against that limitation, especially with panos. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? On 9 Nov 2005 at 19:06, Kenneth Waller wrote: Not great for creating pano sequences is it? :-( Not aware of an issue with panos. What did I miss? It's all to do with the total angle of view required vs the lenses angle view vs the dynamics of the subject, simple really. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Help! What does SV mean? John
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
Super Valuable! Hah. It's some other language equivalent to RE I believe. Tom C. From: John Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 18:07:03 -0800 (PST) Help! What does SV mean? John
RE: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
It is short for the Scandinavian word svar ;-) It mean the same as RE. So a RE: SV: means the same as RE: RE: In other words, a Scandinavian has posted a reply to a reply Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy) -Original Message- From: John Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10. november 2005 03:07 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD? Help! What does SV mean? John
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 22:26:31 +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: Fiddely CF card removal. You know, people have commented on this repeatedly, and I just don't get it. Once I found the eject button at the bottom of the CF card well, removal hasn't been a problem at all. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
The reasons not to buy an *ist D are pretty simple, IMO. 1. It's now a hair's breadth away from being a two year old camera. 2. The other D's are a fraction of the cost, with the caveat that they are less than the *ist D in some ways, and have improvements in other ways. 3. If there's a new DSLR from Pentax around the corner, and one must have a Pentax, it makes sense to wait and see. 4. The other two big names are pummeling the heck out of Pentax at the moment, and there's no sign of it letting up. That being said. The *ist D is nice in it's own right. I'm curious to see how long Pentax or any DSLR manufacturer will service it's DSLR product. I bet it's under 6 years. I bet that in the forseeable future, DSLR's will be treated like scanners, computers, printers. Oh, it's defective? Here take this returned, refurbished one, we might have had our staff look at. Tom C.
