Re: The *ist camera

[Alan Chan]

Actually I have no complaint on the *ist, not even the aperture coupling 
thing because all my F/FA lenses will work. But the QC thing really got to 
my nerve. Well... I should stop now as I have been repeating myself far too 
many times (just hope the mesage would be passed to Japan though the English 
speaking God somehow).

regards,
Alan Chan
"I have been reading the posts about this camera and wonder why so many,
perhaps most, of the members of this group are so interested in such a
crappy little thing?"
I won't buy a starkist. I might buy one for my wife if she needs another 
body. She is now using my old ZX-50. I am, though, very interested in the 
starkist because, for an entry/medium level body, it is packed with many of 
the features that I use on my PZ-1p bodies. I hope this means that 
higher-quality bodies with these features will be forthcoming. In 
particular, offering center-weighted and spot metering on the starkist 
means, I hope, that it will be possible to use slide film in the less 
expensive Pentax cameras.
_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: The *ist camera

[Alan Chan]

Alan (and others making a fuss including myself) have bought new and 
expensive
Pentax kit recently, so how has this helped with *ist compatibility issues?
Actually Pentax showed me how attractive the FAJ idea is by showing me the 
faulty 'A' button.  :-)  [I am surprised I can still laugh]

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: The *ist camera

[Alan Chan]

If you want Pentax to listen, then do something that directly effects their 
bottom line - like buying something from them that is currently in 
production.
I just did, with FA*200/2.8 & FA31/1.8. Both had QC problem and costed me 
lots of time & energy to get the replaced or fixed. I doubt many insane 
people like me on earth would still stick with Pentax after so many problem 
with their BRAND NEW lenses. Mind you they aren't cheap lenses, but * &  
LIMITED lenses. But I don't think one customer could do anything. If I were 
rich enough, I would fly to Pentax Japan and throw my faulty 200 & 31 right 
to their office to show them I weren't kidding. They do have an QC issue 
needed to be addressed.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: The *ist camera

[Joseph Tainter]

"I have been reading the posts about this camera and wonder why so many,
perhaps most, of the members of this group are so interested in such a
crappy little thing?"
I won't buy a starkist. I might buy one for my wife if she needs another 
body. She is now using my old ZX-50. I am, though, very interested in 
the starkist because, for an entry/medium level body, it is packed with 
many of the features that I use on my PZ-1p bodies. I hope this means 
that higher-quality bodies with these features will be forthcoming. In 
particular, offering center-weighted and spot metering on the starkist 
means, I hope, that it will be possible to use slide film in the less 
expensive Pentax cameras.

Joe

Re: The *ist camera

[Rob Studdert]

On 8 Jun 2003 at 3:25, P Temmerman wrote:

> If you want Pentax to listen, then do something that directly effects their
> bottom line - like buying something from them that is currently in production. 

Alan (and others making a fuss including myself) have bought new and expensive 
Pentax kit recently, so how has this helped with *ist compatibility issues?

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: OT CF card reader (was: Re: The *ist camera)

[Juey Chong Ong]

Who uses a Mac and a USB CF card reader. One that they're happy with, 
of
course. I"m in the market, and prefer to not believe all the hype.
I use two: a Kingston multi-card reader that takes CF, Smartmedia, SD, 
etc. It has two slots, one for CF and the other shared among the other 
form factors. You can actually stick cards into both slots and read 
(and maybe write) simulaneously. It has no eject button for the CF slot 
but so far, I haven't had any bent pins.

My other reader is the built-in reader on the Epson Stylus Photo 925. 
It works nicely and has three slots but will only recognize one slot at 
a time.

--jc

Re: The *ist camera

[Alan Chan]

They have already been doing it for a while, especially Tokina...
Pro in built quality perhaps, but the optics of Tokina is behind Sigma or 
Tamron all these years. Or so I thought.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Re: The *ist camera

[Brendan]

Actually if you noticed the threads on DPreview and
other places, ALOT of people who have never owned
Pentax would get it you use old screw mount lenses, as
the cost of a new AF 500mm lens isn't pretty.

 --- Pål_Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
Heiko wrote:
> 
> > This is something, that I could accept. I did
> never mind the crippled  
> > mount on a MZ-30/50/60, as there is no need to buy
> such a camera. But I  
> > can't understand, why cost cutting is an argument
> on a 2000,- DLSR. What  
> > might that saving be? 10,- Euro/US$?
> 
> My guess is that the majority of the *ist D buyers
> come from digital P&S. The other major customer base
> are current Pentax customers with current Pentax
> equipment (which is compatible). A certain number
> come from other brands of slr's. I suspect that the
> smallest customer base are people using 20+ year old
> lenses. 
> Of course there may also be technical and marketing
> reasons for limited compatibility.
> 
> Pål
> 
> 
> 
>  

__ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

Re: The *ist camera

[Pål Jensen]

Heiko wrote:

> This is something, that I could accept. I did never mind the crippled  
> mount on a MZ-30/50/60, as there is no need to buy such a camera. But I  
> can't understand, why cost cutting is an argument on a 2000,- DLSR. What  
> might that saving be? 10,- Euro/US$?

My guess is that the majority of the *ist D buyers come from digital P&S. The other 
major customer base are current Pentax customers with current Pentax equipment (which 
is compatible). A certain number come from other brands of slr's. I suspect that the 
smallest customer base are people using 20+ year old lenses. 
Of course there may also be technical and marketing reasons for limited compatibility.

Pål

Re: The *ist camera

[whickersworld]

Roland Mabo wrote:
>
>Many here assumes that the *ist D is not going to be as
good as Nikon or
>Canons DSLR's. I wonder how people will react if it simply
outperforms the
>Nikon D100 and the Canon 10D in terms of image quality...


Hi Roland,

It will use the same Sony (?) CCD chip as the D100 (this has
already been admitted by Nikon), but with different
firmware.  Can we realistically expect the Pentax firmware
to be *so* much better than Nikon's?

John

Re: The *ist camera

[Artur Ledóchowski]

- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The *ist camera


  When 
> third party
> lens makers produce "Pro" quality lenses for not much more than Pentax 
> produces consumer
> quality lenses who's do you think new users will buy?

They have already been doing it for a while, especially Tokina...
Regards
Artur

Re: The *ist camera

[Peter Alling]

If these cameras can use A lenses they support 99% of the old 
protocol.  Leaving out
the last 1% is not a cost saving, it's a scheme to sell new lenses.  When 
third party
lens makers produce "Pro" quality lenses for not much more than Pentax 
produces consumer
quality lenses who's do you think new users will buy?

At 05:44 PM 6/7/03 +0200, you wrote:
Heiko wrote:

> I cannot see why the abandonment of the aperture simulator should help
> implementing IS or USM. If they need a new protocol to implement those
> features, then they will have to make changes that either abandon the
> whole compatility or they will have to ensure backwards compatibilty
> (e.g. by adding new contacts or using the PZ-contacts). And in both
> cases I cannot see the aperture simulator being an obstacle.
You're basically right. However, the lack of cmpatibility is a cost issue 
first and foremost in case of the *ists. They have implemented though a 
new protocol and this protocol open of for electronic aperture control and 
control of built in motors in lenses in addition to power zoom. Pentax may 
want to install a user base for this new protocol before they take it any 
further.

Pål
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  --Groucho Marx

Re: The *ist camera

[Artur Ledóchowski]

- Original Message -
From: "Heiko Hamann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The *ist camera


> This is something, that I could accept. I did never mind the crippled
> mount on a MZ-30/50/60, as there is no need to buy such a camera. But I
> can't understand, why cost cutting is an argument on a 2000,- DLSR. What
> might that saving be? 10,- Euro/US$?

Yes. And if they do it on both a cheap *ist and expensive (not expensive of
course as far as the DSLR market prices are concerned, but anyway) *ist D,
they may as well easily do it on, say, $500 *ist-something - a possible and
long expected successor to the MZ-5n/3. And THAT is something I don't like,
unless it's justified by some strong arguments.

> Maybe. But then they should inform that user base, what this mount
> modifications are about and why they are changing something that has
> worked for decades. Canon had a clearly communicated reasons to change
> their mount with the introduction of the EOS line. Pentax has
> communicated nothing at all - we had to find out these technical details
> ourselves. And I'm quite sure, that we know much more that most of the
> Pentax people...

Yes. The lack of information is the worst Pentax does. We are being cut away
from the roots without any serious, official reasons. Everything has to be
guessed from advance. All we can say is "maybe Pentax will release IS/USM
lenses", "perhaps they are working on new technoogies", "maybe the new
protocol has been implemented into the new mount" etc... There's nothing for
sure.

> At the moment the only thing I can see is a step back an no perspective
> for improvements. That's really disappointing.

I'll be waiting...I'm not going to get rid of my manual focus equipment -
Super A serves me well. I also plan to get the 67 and focus on the medium
format. However, late in this year I'll have to make my choice about the new
35mm AF body. I had to sell my trusty Z-1p and I'm using the SFXn now. As
I'm going to get into the wedding photography bussiness I'll be needing
something reliable, well equipped, with good flash system, yet not very
expensive. I'll see...
Regards
Artur

Re: The *ist camera

[Cotty]

>We were riding a
>Yam FZR400 and the light weight and relatively low horsepower made it
>easy to outrun the bigger, more powerful bikes on the wet asphalt. I
>have *never* had more fun on a race track.
>
>Later, a friend of mine described my mood after the race thusly: "I've
>never seen anyone get off a race bike with an erection before!"

LOL.

And I thought that was a spanner in your pocket.




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

Re: The *ist camera

[Heiko Hamann]

Hi Pål,

on 07 Jun 03 you wrote in pentax.list:

>> I cannot see why the abandonment of the aperture simulator should
>> help implementing IS or USM. If they need a new protocol to implement

>You're basically right. However, the lack of cmpatibility is a cost issue
>first and foremost in case of the *ists.

This is something, that I could accept. I did never mind the crippled  
mount on a MZ-30/50/60, as there is no need to buy such a camera. But I  
can't understand, why cost cutting is an argument on a 2000,- DLSR. What  
might that saving be? 10,- Euro/US$?

>They have implemented though a new protocol and this protocol open of
>for electronic aperture control and control of built in motors in
>lenses in addition to power zoom. Pentax may want to install a user
>base for this new protocol before they take it any further.

Maybe. But then they should inform that user base, what this mount  
modifications are about and why they are changing something that has  
worked for decades. Canon had a clearly communicated reasons to change  
their mount with the introduction of the EOS line. Pentax has  
communicated nothing at all - we had to find out these technical details  
ourselves. And I'm quite sure, that we know much more that most of the  
Pentax people...

At the moment the only thing I can see is a step back an no perspective  
for improvements. That's really disappointing.

Cheers, Heiko

Re: The *ist camera

[Pål Jensen]

Artur wrote:

There is NO, and I mean NO, sign of implementing image stabilisation or/and
USM motors from Pentax in any reasonably near future. Such implementation
exists only in the virtual reality of our list, it's nothing but our wishful
thinking. Yet the signs of abandoning the compatibility are VERY strong. 

REPLY:

Actually, it exist in Pentax laboratories. That doesn't mean it will ever be released. 
The abandonment of compatibility opens up for new technology like USM and IS with the 
new protocol, according to Pentax patents.

Pål

Re: The *ist camera

[Pål Jensen]

Alan wrote:

2) Pentax will suffer a slow and painful death because most Pentax long time users 
will abandon their good old K mount lenses for good (why stay with Pentax if they must 
re-invest all over again?). Make sense? :-)



REPLY:

>From Pentax point of view people who are using 20+ year old lenses aren't Pentax 
>customers. They are either former Pentax customers or never been Pentax customers. 
>For all practical purposes, these "long time users" are really long time lost for 
>Pentax just like the Canon FD users are for Canon. 
Pentax have provided ample opportunities for old time users to upgrade to AF lenses 
with full compatibitity. Particularly the MZ-5/3 and the MZ-S have provided a path 
from manual focus to new technology. 
Pentax will certainly suffer a slow death if they cater for people who use 20+ year 
old lenses. 


Pål

Re: The *ist camera

[Keith Whaley]

Oooo! That has sort of a Lotus flavor, doesn't it? I do like it!
I'd love one in my stable, if I had one...a stable that is.
Thanks for the site URL. I'm going back for a good look. 

keith

Cotty wrote:
> 
> >> (I would love a Ginetta to run around in on sunny Sunday afternoons
> >> though - oops, don't tell the Mrs..)
> 
> >I thoguht a small Ginetta was a gin/rocks, with a twist!
> 
> Try this for size :-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
> 
> ___/\__
> ||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
> ||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
> _
> Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

Re: The *ist camera

[Mark Roberts]

Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>>Boy, you got that right! I used to road race motorcycles (which is a
>>less expensive hobby than racing cars) and could easily go through a few
>>hundred dollars in expenses per race weekend. That's money burned with
>>nothing to show for it. 
>
>...except a huge smile and a load of bugs on yer teeth 

I once did a two-hour endurance race with a friend of mine. Two-hour
endurance races are a lot of fun. One pit stop, an hour of racing for
each rider. I rode the second hour. 

It rained for the whole race. I'd never raced in the rain before. It was
intimidating, to say the least. (Oh yeah, and a rider had been killed in
a crash - in the dry - just that morning.) Anyway, it took me about 3
laps to get used to it and from then on I had a blast. We were riding a
Yam FZR400 and the light weight and relatively low horsepower made it
easy to outrun the bigger, more powerful bikes on the wet asphalt. I
have *never* had more fun on a race track.

Later, a friend of mine described my mood after the race thusly: "I've
never seen anyone get off a race bike with an erection before!"

He was, of course, exaggerating.

A bit.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: The *ist camera

[Rüdiger Neumann]

Hallo Cotty,


>Yery true, and I was extremely sad to have to let go my A*85mm f/1.4 -
>the best lens of all time in my very humble opinion. However, I am
>beginning to see that it may have been of limited value when attached to
>the *ist D.
>


The A lenses will work, only the K and M lenses will not work

RE: The *ist camera

[tom]

> -Original Message-
> From: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> i was out shooting today with a guy from Kodak and he said
> that the 14n's noise level is too high for landscape and
> nature photographers that need extra long shutter speeds.
> much below 1/4s and the noise becomes noticeably worse. at
> higher shutter speeds, the noise isn't nearly as noticeable.

I was under the impression from folks who had test driven it that it
just wasn't usable above ISO 100 due to high noise.

Most of the pros using 35mm around here (that I know) use Nikon, and I
know a few of them who *really* wanted the 14n to be their answer, and
they just couldn't make it work for them.

I might have bought Nikon glass for it since it's full-frame and was
about 1/2 the price of the 1DS, but I was put off by these user
reports. I think dpreview came to a similar conclusion.

tv

Re: The *ist camera

[Alan Chan]

You might just get him fired this weekend.  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
i was out shooting today with a guy from Kodak and he said that the 14n's 
noise level is too high for landscape and nature photographers that need 
extra long shutter speeds. much below 1/4s and the noise becomes noticeably 
worse. at higher shutter speeds, the noise isn't nearly as noticeable.
_
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online  
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

Re: The *ist camera

[Alan Chan]

I feel the same. There is no doubt Canon has a much better designed and 
integrated system, and I mean SYSTEM.

regards,
Alan Chan
I think you can remove Nikon from that equation. There are just as many
unknowns as to where they're going as there are with Pentax. That's why
a lot of people from both camps are moving to Canon. If it gets to the
point where I need to consider changing systems Nikon won't even be in
the running. I expect it was the same for Tom.
_
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: The *ist camera

[Alan Chan]

Simple. We are being treated like mushrooms
by Pentax (kept in the dark and fed on bull shit).
Last time the program I watched, they said they used horse shit.  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Re: The *ist camera

[Alan Chan]

I was a bit unclear. I meant that the lens mount in the body might support 
IS/VR and USM in the lenses and it might be too much to have support for 
mechanical aperture too.
I see.  :-)  But that raise another question. To implement IS, Pentax might 
run into a design limitation if they don't abandon the spring loaded 
mechanical aperture design. The IS motors and mechanisms must be placed in 
front of the aperture blades (or they will need to make the lenses extra 
"fat" so the aperture coupling arm won't interfere with the IS mechanisms). 
Not that possible imho.

regards,
Alan Chan
_
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*   
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: The *ist camera

[Mark Roberts]

Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I raced an off-road racer in the 1990s - you wanna see a money pit?
>Campaign one of those for a couple of years! Buying DSLRs is peanuts.
>With the money spent over 5 years of building and racing, I could have
>bought half a dozen 1Ds's. Hey, photography is CHEAP.

Boy, you got that right! I used to road race motorcycles (which is a
less expensive hobby than racing cars) and could easily go through a few
hundred dollars in expenses per race weekend. That's money burned with
nothing to show for it. And that doesn't even include buying the
hardware to get started. And the ever-present possibility that a moment
of poor judgement could turn your multi-thousand dollar race bike into
an abstract sculpture in a split second. (Of course, that same moment of
poor judgement could also get you killed in the same split second, in
which case...who cares what it costs?!)

There are an amazing number of pure hobbyists who've bought the Canon
1Ds. Photography - even cutting edge digital photography - is cheap
compared to some hobbies.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: The *ist camera

[Leonard Paris]

The features that I have been able to find out about for the *ist D seem to 
be a pretty good set to me.  The main feature I like is the ability to use 
all of my Pentax glass, which won't fit on my Canon digital at all.

Len
---

From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: The *ist camera
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:13:09 +0300
I have been reading the posts about this camera and wonder why so many,
perhaps most, of the members of this group are so interested in such a
crappy little thing? We have the MZ-S, the PZ-1P and many other fine Pentax
offerings available. Now Pentax produce a tiny, featherweight, camera that
won't use all the lenses we already have and everyone jumps up and down 
with
delight. And to cap it all they will soon produce a digital twin that won't
compare to those already available under other brand names.

Don
___
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002


_
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Re: The *ist camera

[Keith Whaley]

Who uses a Mac and a USB CF card reader. One that they're happy with, of
course. I"m in the market, and prefer to not believe all the hype.

keith

Christian Skofteland wrote:
> 
> On Friday 06 June 2003 14:20, Bruce Dayton wrote:
> > Cotty,
> >
> > I agree.  I don't even consider using the camera itself.  Card reader
> > is always hooked up, no looking for the right cable, technology you
> > want (upgradeable).  Seems to be a major non-issue.
> >
> >
> > Bruce
> 
> Ditto.  With the Optio I used to hook it up every time I downloaded images.
> Now I have a CF reader at home and one at work.  They are so cheap too!
> 
> Christian

Re: The *ist camera

[Keith Whaley]

I thoguht a small Ginetta was a gin/rocks, with a twist!

keith

Cotty wrote:
> 
> >what I don't understand (not from you, Don, but from other posts) is that
> >everyone is ready to run out and buy a 10D because the *ist-D is not
> >compatible with K and M lenses.  Well guess what?  Neither are the offerings
> >from Canon and Nikon.  You'll still need to replace ALL your lenses, right
> >Tom and Cotty?
> 
> Yery true, and I was extremely sad to have to let go my A*85mm f/1.4 -
> the best lens of all time in my very humble opinion. However, I am
> beginning to see that it may have been of limited value when attached to
> the *ist D.
> 
> It's taken me 6 months, but I have sold all but a few Pentax and KA mount
> lenses, and built up  a range of EOS mount glass, only one of which is
> actually a Canon lens. This is because I tend to equip myself with fast
> lenses (dare I say it - 'pro' ;-) which are obviously going to be more
> expensive. I see no point to lenses with max apertures of f/5.6 for
> instance. Canon 'L' glass is very costly and I have yet to gather the
> nerve to splash out on even a used example. I must say that the sheer
> range of lenses is pretty staggering and in a few years I would hope to
> shed some of my Sigma bottles in favour of Canon, oops I mean C*n*n.
> 
> Depreciation on the DSLR is frightening. I paid £1600 for the body last
> October. The very last ones off the shelves can be had for just under a
> grand, with used prices at anywhere between 800 and a grand. In one
> year's time, the £1299 10D will be hovering around £700 used. That's a
> very steep drop and you need to be able to write off that loss if buying
> into the big D. I can write it off because it's purely hobby, and as such
> I don't have to justify any of the costs. Besides, I don't own any of my
> gear, Visa does ;-)
> 
> I raced an off-road racer in the 1990s - you wanna see a money pit?
> Campaign one of those for a couple of years! Buying DSLRs is peanuts.
> With the money spent over 5 years of building and racing, I could have
> bought half a dozen 1Ds's. Hey, photography is CHEAP.
> 
> (I would love a Ginetta to run around in on sunny Sunday afternoons
> though - oops, don't tell the Mrs..)
> 
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
> 
> ___/\__
> ||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
> ||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
> _
> Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

Re: The *ist camera

[Bruce Rubenstein]

Few will care. It has to be cheaper/smaller/lighter than the D100 and 
10D. That's the area that Pentax competes in; not performance.

BR

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  I wonder how people will react if it simply outperforms the Nikon 
D100 and the Canon 10D in terms of image quality...

Re: The *ist camera

[Dr E D F Williams]

I got an original Pentax 'Mount Adapter K' #30120 today in the post with a
POL phototube for my Russian microscope. Now I understand the posts about
the adapters getting stuck in the camera. This could happen quite easily but
doesn't seem to be a common fault with the original Pentax ring. I can now
screw any one of my Pentax bodies to the tube and intend to start taking
pictures (ME Super) to test exposures tomorrow. Christian, you won't be able
to fault me for this one -- the Microscope agent in Chicago sent someone to
a camera store to buy it for me and didn't take a profit.

Don
___
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002


- Original Message -
From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 6:34 PM
Subject: Re: The *ist camera


> On Friday 06 June 2003 11:27, tom wrote:
> >
> >
> > Tell me who said the *ist-D wouldn't give good image quality? I expect
> > it will be in the same league as the 10D and D100.
> >
>
> Don wrote it in his origianl post.  I'm expecting the same as well which
> makes me happy because I think both those cameras perform to  a level that
I
> will be very happy with.
>
> > I switched because:
> >
> > - the 10D was available 3 months ago. (I think it's already paid for
> > itself. The Pentax selloff paid for everything else.)
> > - I can upgrade to a 1DS.
> > - Canon has a more appealing line of pro lenses wrt focal length, USM
> > and IS.
>
> I know why you switched and they are very good reasons for someone like
> yourself that makes money off his gear and needed digital NOW.  I was
totally
> impressed by the USM lenses.  I think my comment was: "I didn't hear or
feel
> it focus"  If I were to dump Pentax for digital today it would be for
> Canon.
>
> > - Software support for Canon raw files is widespread. At this point
> > it's 0 for Pentax.
>
> There is no such thing as Pentax RAW files at this point in time.  But,
> because Pentax is always the bastard child of Photography, I don't expect
too
> much support for it when it is released.  I was looking at a GNU *nix
digital
> camera application that supports just about every brand of digicam
except
> Pentax.
>
> Christian
>
>

Re: The *ist camera

[Dr E D F Williams]

That's terribly funny ... but I thought it was horse shit the growers fed to
their fungi?

Don
___
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002


- Original Message -
From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: The *ist camera


> On 6 Jun 2003 at 16:55, Roland Mabo wrote:
>
> > That's something I dont understand too.
> > Many here assumes that the *ist D is not going to be as good as Nikon or
> > Canons DSLR's. I wonder how people will react if it simply outperforms
the Nikon
> > D100 and the Canon 10D in terms of image quality...
>
> There are so many sceptics because Pentax is all "if"s and Canon and Nikon
are
> current and quantifiable options. Simple. We are being treated like
mushrooms
> by Pentax (kept in the dark and fed on bull shit).
>
> 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: The *ist camera

[Heiko Hamann]

Hi Christian,

on 06 Jun 03 you wrote in pentax.list:

>No. The older ones have just .JPG and the 550 has .TIF and .JPG

The 230 produces Tif, too.

Cheers, Heiko

Re: The *ist camera

[Christian Skofteland]

>
> Do any of the Optio's output raw files?
>
> tv

No. The older ones have just .JPG and the 550 has .TIF and .JPG

Christian

RE: The *ist camera

[tom]

> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I think you can remove Nikon from that equation. There are
> just as many
> unknowns as to where they're going as there are with
> Pentax. That's why
> a lot of people from both camps are moving to Canon. If it
> gets to the
> point where I need to consider changing systems Nikon won't
> even be in
> the running. I expect it was the same for Tom.

I skipped Nikon because at that point they had said they weren't
interested in doing a full-frame, the 14n sucks, and I liked the Canon
lens offerings.

I don't think Nikon is a bad choice - Kodak will improve the 14n at
some point, and who knows what Fuji will do? The S2 is a nice camera.

BTW, one of the lenses I had a bad jones for was the 85/1.2. I tried
one out the other day and it's ridiculously large, and *really* slow
to focus.

I might end up getting it when I get a body with a better finder than
the 10D, but on the 10D it just doesn't work for me.

tv

Re: The *ist camera

[Mark Roberts]

"tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> -Original Message-
>> From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>> >- Software support for Canon raw files is widespread. At this point
>> >  it's 0 for Pentax.
>>
>> Wouldn't be surprised if RAW for the Pentax were the same
>> as the Nikon's
>> D100 if they do indeed use the same CCD.
>
>Could it be that simple? I thought NEF was proprietary to Nikon, and
>that the raw format had something to do with in-camera
>post-processing.
>
>I don't know anything about CCD's...

You could be right. All my knowledge of CCDs is on a technical level, so
issues like proprietary file formats for RAW images are something I
haven't been following. Obviously, I need to start doing so.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: The *ist camera

[Mark Roberts]

"Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>There are so many sceptics because Pentax is all "if"s and Canon and Nikon are 
>current and quantifiable options. 

I think you can remove Nikon from that equation. There are just as many
unknowns as to where they're going as there are with Pentax. That's why
a lot of people from both camps are moving to Canon. If it gets to the
point where I need to consider changing systems Nikon won't even be in
the running. I expect it was the same for Tom.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

RE: The *ist camera

[tom]

 -Original Message-
> From: Christian Skofteland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> On Friday 06 June 2003 11:27, tom wrote:
> >
> >
> > Tell me who said the *ist-D wouldn't give good image
> quality? I expect
> > it will be in the same league as the 10D and D100.
> >
>
> Don wrote it in his origianl post.

Ah. Well, generally I think people expect it to have image quality on
par with the other 6 meg cameras since it'll have the same ccd as the
D100.

  I was looking at
> a GNU *nix digital
> camera application that supports just about every brand of
> digicam except
> Pentax.

Do any of the Optio's output raw files?

tv

RE: The *ist camera

[tom]

> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> >- Software support for Canon raw files is widespread. At this point
> >  it's 0 for Pentax.
>
> Wouldn't be surprised if RAW for the Pentax were the same
> as the Nikon's
> D100 if they do indeed use the same CCD.

Could it be that simple? I thought NEF was proprietary to Nikon, and
that the raw format had something to do with in-camera
post-processing.

I don't know anything about CCD's...

tv

Re: The *ist camera

[Christian Skofteland]

On Friday 06 June 2003 11:27, tom wrote:
>
>
> Tell me who said the *ist-D wouldn't give good image quality? I expect
> it will be in the same league as the 10D and D100.
>

Don wrote it in his origianl post.  I'm expecting the same as well which 
makes me happy because I think both those cameras perform to  a level that I 
will be very happy with.

> I switched because:
>
> - the 10D was available 3 months ago. (I think it's already paid for
> itself. The Pentax selloff paid for everything else.)
> - I can upgrade to a 1DS.
> - Canon has a more appealing line of pro lenses wrt focal length, USM
> and IS.

I know why you switched and they are very good reasons for someone like 
yourself that makes money off his gear and needed digital NOW.  I was totally 
impressed by the USM lenses.  I think my comment was: "I didn't hear or feel 
it focus"  If I were to dump Pentax for digital today it would be for 
Canon.

> - Software support for Canon raw files is widespread. At this point
> it's 0 for Pentax.

There is no such thing as Pentax RAW files at this point in time.  But, 
because Pentax is always the bastard child of Photography, I don't expect too 
much support for it when it is released.  I was looking at a GNU *nix digital 
camera application that supports just about every brand of digicam except 
Pentax.

Christian

Re: The *ist camera

[Rob Studdert]

On 6 Jun 2003 at 16:55, Roland Mabo wrote:

> That's something I dont understand too.
> Many here assumes that the *ist D is not going to be as good as Nikon or 
> Canons DSLR's. I wonder how people will react if it simply outperforms the Nikon
> D100 and the Canon 10D in terms of image quality...

There are so many sceptics because Pentax is all "if"s and Canon and Nikon are 
current and quantifiable options. Simple. We are being treated like mushrooms 
by Pentax (kept in the dark and fed on bull shit).

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: The *ist camera

[Mark Roberts]

"tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> From: Roland Mabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> >From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Well guess what?  Neither are the
>> >offerings
>> >from Canon and Nikon.  You'll still need to replace ALL
>> your lenses, right
>> >Tom and Cotty?
>>
>> That's something I dont understand too.
>> Many here assumes that the *ist D is not going to be as
>> good as Nikon or
>> Canons DSLR's. I wonder how people will react if it simply
>> outperforms the
>> Nikon D100 and the Canon 10D in terms of image quality...
>
>Tell me who said the *ist-D wouldn't give good image quality? I expect
>it will be in the same league as the 10D and D100.
>
>I switched because:
>
>- the 10D was available 3 months ago. (I think it's already paid for
>  itself. The Pentax selloff paid for everything else.)
>- I can upgrade to a 1DS.
>- Canon has a more appealing line of pro lenses wrt focal length, USM
>  and IS.
>- Canon has an interesting flash system (TTL IR trigger)

Flash is a big weak point for Pentax. I'm *still* waiting for a more
powerful version of the AF360FGZ :(

>- Software support for Canon raw files is widespread. At this point
>  it's 0 for Pentax.

Wouldn't be surprised if RAW for the Pentax were the same as the Nikon's
D100 if they do indeed use the same CCD. Still, there's no way of
knowing until the camera is available.

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: The *ist camera

[Rob Studdert]

On 6 Jun 2003 at 8:25, Christian Skofteland wrote:

> what I don't understand (not from you, Don, but from other posts) is that
> everyone is ready to run out and buy a 10D because the *ist-D is not
> compatible with K and M lenses.  Well guess what?  Neither are the offerings
> from Canon and Nikon.  You'll still need to replace ALL your lenses, right Tom
> and Cotty?

It's a case of getting it over and done with and not having to piss about 
speculating any longer. Unfortunately for those of us needing a digital 
solution it looks like it's either take hit in the guts now or later :-(

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: The *ist camera

[tom]

> -Original Message-
> From: Roland Mabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> >From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Well guess what?  Neither are the
> >offerings
> >from Canon and Nikon.  You'll still need to replace ALL
> your lenses, right
> >Tom and Cotty?
>
> That's something I dont understand too.
> Many here assumes that the *ist D is not going to be as
> good as Nikon or
> Canons DSLR's. I wonder how people will react if it simply
> outperforms the
> Nikon D100 and the Canon 10D in terms of image quality...

Tell me who said the *ist-D wouldn't give good image quality? I expect
it will be in the same league as the 10D and D100.

I switched because:

- the 10D was available 3 months ago. (I think it's already paid for
itself. The Pentax selloff paid for everything else.)
- I can upgrade to a 1DS.
- Canon has a more appealing line of pro lenses wrt focal length, USM
and IS.
- Canon has an interesting flash system (TTL IR trigger)
- Software support for Canon raw files is widespread. At this point
it's 0 for Pentax.

tv

Re: Re: The *ist camera

[Artur Ledóchowski]

Użytkownik Roland Mabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał:

>Pentax has patented a KAF3 lens mount with support for IS and USM lenses. 

Don't feel offended but calling for the patents we saw many times in the past years 
make me laugh. We saw NOTHING more than them...

>They also have patented IS and USM technology. This is old news, Pentax has 
>had the patents for a long time. It seems like their changing their lens 
>mount now (the electrical aperture protocol seems to have changed, for 
>example) and this may be a sign of IS and USM.

Yes - only "may be". But none can be sure in any way about it. Moreover, there are no 
signs of it...

>The entry level MZ-60 is in many ways more advanced than the first MZ - the 
>midmarket MZ-5.

I can see no such way.

>The MZ-60 has, for example, auto bracketing and exposure memory lock. The 
>MZ-5 hasn\'t.

Compared to the things the MZ-60 has NOT, the superiority of the MZ-5 is obvious

>If you compare the MZ-60 with the entry level Z-70, or Z-10 - the MZ-60 is 
>way more advanced. So, I say that it does not exist such a thing as "usual 
>Pentax entry level". Everyone of them has been quite unusual in my opinion.

No way - MZ-60 is crappy little thing. It has no cable release socket, doesn't accept 
any macro accessories, not even the A-series lenses, for example. ANY Z-series camera 
is better than the MZ-60

>
>In Sweden, the *ist with FAJ 28-80 will sell for the same price as the 
>MZ-6/ZX-L with FA 28-90.

Yet the MZ-6 offers the compatibility. Who cares for 16-segment matrix - the 6-segment 
one does its job very good. Who cares for the 11-point AF - most of the Pentax users 
use only the central sensors and recompose...

>The MZ-5n is more expensive. So, the *ist replaces the entry level MZ-6/MZ-7 
>and Pentax may abandon the entry-entry level market (or lowering the price 
>of the MZ-6 so that it replaces the MZ-60).

Sincere thanks to Pentax for such a replacement for the MZ-6. I don't think I'll have 
it...

>We don\'t know how the *ist D performs yet. Pixels aren\'t everything.
>Sigma SD9 is 3.3Mp if I remember correctly now, but thank\'s to it\'s Foveon 
>technology - it has 10 million photo sensors. Fuji claims that their 3Mp 
>cameras outputs 6mp... thank\'s to the Super CCD technology. There\'s more to 
>a camera than no. of Mp. So, let\'s wait with the judgement until we actually 
>can try the camera and see how it performs in real life. One shouldn\'t judge 
>cameras by technical sepcifications only.

Of course there's a lot more to the digital camera - like, say FireWire interface in 
the SD9. Or the ability to use IS/USM lenses on the D60...
Regards
Artur

Re: The *ist camera

[Mark Roberts]

Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>The fact that a lot of cameras have a crappy manual interface doesn't
>make me like it any better.  If you are going to control the aperture
>from the body, you need a separate dial from the shutter dial - like
>the PZ-1p.
>
>That interface is a major reason I will not be getting an *ist - even
>though I originally budgeted for one.  I ended up getting an MX
>instead.  Oh, well - to each his own.

I originally considered getting an *ist as a replacement for my MX (you
know those MX's are getting a bit long in the tooth) which is part of my
small/light travel kit. But the lack of K/M compatibility kills it for
me because half the lenses in my "mini-kit" are M lenses (because of
their size, obviously).

-- 
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

Re: The *ist camera

[Roland Mabo]

From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The *ist camera
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 08:25:01 -0400
what I don't understand (not from you, Don, but from other posts) is that
everyone is ready to run out and buy a 10D because the *ist-D is not
compatible with K and M lenses.  Well guess what?  Neither are the 
offerings
from Canon and Nikon.  You'll still need to replace ALL your lenses, right
Tom and Cotty?
That's something I dont understand too.
Many here assumes that the *ist D is not going to be as good as Nikon or 
Canons DSLR's. I wonder how people will react if it simply outperforms the 
Nikon D100 and the Canon 10D in terms of image quality...

Best wishes
Roland
_
Lättare att hitta drömresan med MSN Resor http://www.msn.se/resor/

Re: The *ist camera

[Bruce Dayton]

Roland,

The fact that a lot of cameras have a crappy manual interface doesn't
make me like it any better.  If you are going to control the aperture
from the body, you need a separate dial from the shutter dial - like
the PZ-1p.

That interface is a major reason I will not be getting an *ist - even
though I originally budgeted for one.  I ended up getting an MX
instead.  Oh, well - to each his own.


Bruce



Friday, June 6, 2003, 1:37:02 AM, you wrote:

>>From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: Re: The *ist camera
>>Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 01:23:14 -0700
>>
>>One thing that
>>I haven't heard much about that concerns me is the manual interface.
>>It appears that it works much like a ZX-50 or 30.  Which means there
>>really is only one dial to spin.  That changes shutter speeds.  To
>>change apertures, you have to hold in a button and spin the same dial.
>>I have tried that and REALLY disliked it.  Perhaps people attracted to
>>it will rarely shoot it in manual mode?

RM> The MZ-6 and MZ-7 works the same way if you don't use the aperture ring on 
RM> the lenses.
RM> Anyway, Nikon F75/65/55, Canon EOS 3000/300 and Minolta Dynax 4/5 uses the 
RM> same method. One dial to turn for both aperture and shutter, one button to 
RM> press to change between aperture or shutter.

RM> The *ist D uses twin dials, so it's different.

RM> Best wishes
RM> Roland

RM> _
RM> Hitta rätt köpare på MSN Köp & Sälj http://www.msn.se/koposalj

Re: The *ist camera

[Bojidar_Dimitrov]

Christian Skofteland wrote:

> So, when anyone is ready to dump Pentax, I'd
> like first crack at their A and FA lenses!

http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/for_sale/items/

Thank you,
Boz

Re: The *ist camera

[Christian Skofteland]

- Original Message -
From: "Dr E D F Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> And to cap it all they will soon produce a digital twin that won't
> compare to those already available under other brand names.
>
> Don

How do you know it won't compare to Nikon or Canon?  We have yet to see
image quality results.  As for features it looks like a 10D or D100. I agree
that Pentax needs to offer USM and IS lenses, but that's been a fundamental
issue with Pentax since the beginning of time (or at least when Canon and
Nikon were doing it).

what I don't understand (not from you, Don, but from other posts) is that
everyone is ready to run out and buy a 10D because the *ist-D is not
compatible with K and M lenses.  Well guess what?  Neither are the offerings
from Canon and Nikon.  You'll still need to replace ALL your lenses, right
Tom and Cotty?

I played with Tom's 10D and another friend's D100 and they are amazing
pieces of equipment but I can't afford to replace my lenses for an EOS or
Nikon mount.  So, when anyone is ready to dump Pentax, I'd like first crack
at their A and FA lenses!

Christian

Re[2]: The *ist camera

[Alin Flaider]

Artur wrote:

AL> The evidences of the end of traditional Pentax era are clear. They have
AL> obviously started walking the Nikon-like path. But i fear that they are
AL> abandoning their old strengths without having the new ones.
AL> The next camera will be the answer...

   The next camera might be very well a 10D for many around here. Not
   that this would make any one happy.
   
   It seems like no one at Pentax asked himself "why would a Pentax
   customer buy the *ist d ?". But hey, perhaps they want to sell it
   to the Saturnians...
 
   Servus,   Alin

Re: The *ist camera

[Artur Ledóchowski]

- Original Message -
From: "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The *ist camera


> I doubt that very much. Implementing IS/VR inside the body is not a very
> practical solution imho.

There's more IMHO...
There is NO, and I mean NO, sign of implementing image stabilisation or/and
USM motors from Pentax in any reasonably near future. Such implementation
exists only in the virtual reality of our list, it's nothing but our wishful
thinking. Yet the signs of abandoning the compatibility are VERY strong. So
far the only bodies which didn't support the compatibility were MZ60/50/30 -
the very simple bodies, with no bells and whistles. One may call the *ist
"crappy" and "cheap" but can't deny, that it's more advanced than the
MZ-10/7/6, even the MZ-5n/3 (I disregard the Z-series bodies now). That is
unusual and I don't agree with anybody claiming that one shouldn't expect
the beginner camera to support the compatibility - *ist is NOT the usual
Pentax entry level one.
And now the crippled mount goes much higher - into the *ist D. This fact
makes me depressed. I've already informed a few of my friends that Pentax is
about to release the only DSLR that accepts good old and inexpensive K-mount
lenses. As other *ist D parameters aren't that impressive (no full frame
sensor, 6,1 Mp which is OK but no more, USB 1.1 only) this was the thing
that particularly impressed them. Without such compatibility the *ist D will
have difficulties to beat the Sigma SD7 for example...
The evidences of the end of traditional Pentax era are clear. They have
obviously started walking the Nikon-like path. But i fear that they are
abandoning their old strengths without having the new ones.
The next camera will be the answer...
It seems, however, that the MZ-S is the last real Pentax camera:(
Regards
Artur

Re: The *ist camera

[Alan Chan]

But, on the other hand - the new high-end model might not have support for 
older lenses. If it has a new lens mount with support för internal lens 
motors and image shock absorbtion/vibration reduction, then it may be too 
complicated and too expensive to support both the new electrical features 
and the old mechanical ones in one package.
I doubt that very much. Implementing IS/VR inside the body is not a very 
practical solution imho. The reason is every lens is different, and 
therefore demand different approaches. If it could be done inside the body, 
Canon or Nikon should acknowledge the advantage and saved the manufacturing 
cost by not producing so many different IS/VR lenses. Besides, the camera 
would be significantly bigger because they needed to install 2 separate 
motors near the mirror box. I really don't see how it could be done, 
practically.

But, we don't know yet.
Allt this is nothing but pure speculation.
Of course.  :-)

regards,
Alan Chan
_
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Re: The *ist camera

[Roland Mabo]

From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The *ist camera
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 01:23:14 -0700
One thing that
I haven't heard much about that concerns me is the manual interface.
It appears that it works much like a ZX-50 or 30.  Which means there
really is only one dial to spin.  That changes shutter speeds.  To
change apertures, you have to hold in a button and spin the same dial.
I have tried that and REALLY disliked it.  Perhaps people attracted to
it will rarely shoot it in manual mode?
The MZ-6 and MZ-7 works the same way if you don't use the aperture ring on 
the lenses.
Anyway, Nikon F75/65/55, Canon EOS 3000/300 and Minolta Dynax 4/5 uses the 
same method. One dial to turn for both aperture and shutter, one button to 
press to change between aperture or shutter.

The *ist D uses twin dials, so it's different.

Best wishes
Roland
_
Hitta rätt köpare på MSN Köp & Sälj http://www.msn.se/koposalj

Re: The *ist camera

[Roland Mabo]

From: "Alan Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The *ist camera
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 00:29:04 -0700
Since Pentax is going to push FAJ lenses from now on (judging from the spec 
of *ist D), we could expect there will be another high end model to replace 
the MZ-S. The only catch is, it won't support non-A lenses.
We *don't know* that yet.
The new high-end model might support old lenses, because those who wants one 
are likely to have been using Pentax for a long time and so has old lenses - 
while the tiny *ist is mainly for newcomers to Pentax.

But, on the other hand - the new high-end model might not have support for 
older lenses. If it has a new lens mount with support för internal lens 
motors and image shock absorbtion/vibration reduction, then it may be too 
complicated and too expensive to support both the new electrical features 
and the old mechanical ones in one package.

But, we don't know yet.
Allt this is nothing but pure speculation.
Best wishes
Roland
_
Hitta rätt på nätet med MSN Sök http://search.msn.se/

Re: The *ist camera

[Bruce Dayton]

Don,

I haven't gotten the impression that very many are jumping with
delight.  There are a few, but mostly what I hear is disappointment in
the mount compatibility - especially with the *ist D.  One thing that
I haven't heard much about that concerns me is the manual interface.
It appears that it works much like a ZX-50 or 30.  Which means there
really is only one dial to spin.  That changes shutter speeds.  To
change apertures, you have to hold in a button and spin the same dial.
I have tried that and REALLY disliked it.  Perhaps people attracted to
it will rarely shoot it in manual mode?


Bruce



Friday, June 6, 2003, 12:13:09 AM, you wrote:

DEDFW> I have been reading the posts about this camera and wonder why so many,
DEDFW> perhaps most, of the members of this group are so interested in such a
DEDFW> crappy little thing? We have the MZ-S, the PZ-1P and many other fine Pentax
DEDFW> offerings available. Now Pentax produce a tiny, featherweight, camera that
DEDFW> won't use all the lenses we already have and everyone jumps up and down with
DEDFW> delight. And to cap it all they will soon produce a digital twin that won't
DEDFW> compare to those already available under other brand names.

DEDFW> Don
DEDFW> ___
DEDFW> Dr E D F Williams
DEDFW> http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
DEDFW> Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
DEDFW> Updated: March 30, 2002