Re: istDS v istDS2
Sorry, I have been misled by this article in the magazine I mentioned, who described this behavior quite in detail! (Unless this feature actually exists in the DL, but not in the DS2, which I have to doubt about!). Best regards Patrice P.S: I'll contact this magazine and try to figure out how come they describe a feature in deep detail, that does not actually exists! Godfrey DiGiorgi a écrit : I think you are describing the QuickShift feature of the DA and D-FA lenses, Patrice. Has nothing to do with the DS2. DA lenses on the DS and D act the same way. It usually does NOT work in AF-Continuous mode, however, as the body/lens is supposed to be focusing continuously. It's designed to work in AF-Single Shot mode ... lock in the focus on the half press, fine-tune focus with the focus ring. Canon's USM lenses have this feature and call it full time manual focus. It's an excellent feature. Godfrey
Re: istDS v istDS2
Godfrey, all ring type USM or AF-S lenses have this feature. The only other lenses that do are the Pentax ones and the Canon 50mm f1.4 USM which is the only micro-motor USM lens to be clutched (Pentax uses the same trick to get the feature). It's very useful, and I badly miss it on my Tamron 28-75. -Adam Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I think you are describing the QuickShift feature of the DA and D-FA lenses, Patrice. Has nothing to do with the DS2. DA lenses on the DS and D act the same way. It usually does NOT work in AF-Continuous mode, however, as the body/lens is supposed to be focusing continuously. It's designed to work in AF-Single Shot mode ... lock in the focus on the half press, fine-tune focus with the focus ring. Canon's USM lenses have this feature and call it full time manual focus. It's an excellent feature. Godfrey
Re: istDS v istDS2
You mean EF-S rather than AF-S. Yes, Adam, I'm aware of the differences between various types of Canon lenses. I have several of them, after all. ;-) I await the D-FA versions of the Pentax 35/2 AL, 50/1.4 and 77/1.8. Godfrey On Dec 17, 2005, at 4:04 PM, Adam Maas wrote: Godfrey, all ring type USM or AF-S lenses have this feature. The only other lenses that do are the Pentax ones and the Canon 50mm f1.4 USM which is the only micro-motor USM lens to be clutched (Pentax uses the same trick to get the feature). It's very useful, and I badly miss it on my Tamron 28-75. -Adam Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I think you are describing the QuickShift feature of the DA and D- FA lenses, Patrice. Has nothing to do with the DS2. DA lenses on the DS and D act the same way. It usually does NOT work in AF- Continuous mode, however, as the body/lens is supposed to be focusing continuously. It's designed to work in AF-Single Shot mode ... lock in the focus on the half press, fine-tune focus with the focus ring. Canon's USM lenses have this feature and call it full time manual focus. It's an excellent feature. Godfrey
Re: istDS v istDS2
Nope, I mean AF-S, the Nikon USM equivalent. Any ring-type AF-S lens also offers full time manual focus (the only two Nikon micro-motor AF-S lenses are the 18-55 DX and 55-200 DX) -Adam Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: You mean EF-S rather than AF-S. Yes, Adam, I'm aware of the differences between various types of Canon lenses. I have several of them, after all. ;-) I await the D-FA versions of the Pentax 35/2 AL, 50/1.4 and 77/1.8. Godfrey On Dec 17, 2005, at 4:04 PM, Adam Maas wrote: Godfrey, all ring type USM or AF-S lenses have this feature. The only other lenses that do are the Pentax ones and the Canon 50mm f1.4 USM which is the only micro-motor USM lens to be clutched (Pentax uses the same trick to get the feature). It's very useful, and I badly miss it on my Tamron 28-75. -Adam Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I think you are describing the QuickShift feature of the DA and D- FA lenses, Patrice. Has nothing to do with the DS2. DA lenses on the DS and D act the same way. It usually does NOT work in AF- Continuous mode, however, as the body/lens is supposed to be focusing continuously. It's designed to work in AF-Single Shot mode ... lock in the focus on the half press, fine-tune focus with the focus ring. Canon's USM lenses have this feature and call it full time manual focus. It's an excellent feature. Godfrey
Re: istDS v istDS2
This feature consists in the following: in AF-C mode, when the AF locks on the subject, the AF mechanical coupling automatically disengages (like if you switched to MF manually), so you can retouch the focus manually. Releasing and half-depressing the shutter button again re-activates the AF until it locks on a subject again. I've not actually seen it working, it was described in a review in a serious Photo magazine. After double-check, I see this article was about the *ist DL, but I guess this nice feature would be implemented on the higher-end DS2, too, although I've no evidence of it. A similar function is available with the good old DS (can be activated from one of the custom parameters) but with no mechanical coupling retraction system, so one must use specifically designed lenses to be able to use this feature. I don't know about any such lenses however. Regards Patrice Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu a écrit : On 12/14/05, Patrice LACOUTURE (GMail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: AFAIK, apart from this bigger screen, the only hardware difference with the DS, that could not be reflected in the firmware upgrade 2.00, is the retractable autofocus coupling, for manual AF retouching. IMHO, this one is a much more useful improvement (although I haven't seen this one working). (Just my 2 cents) Patrice Retractable autofocus coupling? Could you give us more details? -- Best regards, Alex Sarbu
Re: istDS v istDS2
On 12/16/05, Patrice LACOUTURE (GMail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This feature consists in the following: in AF-C mode, when the AF locks on the subject, the AF mechanical coupling automatically disengages (like if you switched to MF manually), so you can retouch the focus manually. Releasing and half-depressing the shutter button again re-activates the AF until it locks on a subject again. Hmm...my DS2 doesn't quite behave this way. In AF.S mode with certain lenses (with Quick Shift) this is indeed the behavior, but take away either of these requirements and you lose the ability to adjust focus after AF has done its job. -Nevin
Re: istDS v istDS2
I think you are describing the QuickShift feature of the DA and D-FA lenses, Patrice. Has nothing to do with the DS2. DA lenses on the DS and D act the same way. It usually does NOT work in AF-Continuous mode, however, as the body/lens is supposed to be focusing continuously. It's designed to work in AF-Single Shot mode ... lock in the focus on the half press, fine-tune focus with the focus ring. Canon's USM lenses have this feature and call it full time manual focus. It's an excellent feature. Godfrey
Re: istDS v istDS2
Shel Belinkoff a écrit : Have you noticed any differences between the DS and the DS2 in terms of speed or function? Is the larger screen on the back a substantial improvement? A sad thing about this larger screen is that they only changed its size, not its resolution. That is, the screen produces exactly the same image, just bigger... Of course, the bigger the better, as it did not impact the body size, but I don't think the improvement is so dramatic. AFAIK, apart from this bigger screen, the only hardware difference with the DS, that could not be reflected in the firmware upgrade 2.00, is the retractable autofocus coupling, for manual AF retouching. IMHO, this one is a much more useful improvement (although I haven't seen this one working). Regarding speed differences, I do not work for Pentax, but I do embedded software development for a living, and I'm pretty confident that DS (especially 2.00), DL and DS2 firmwares are just 3 different compilations of the same source code, with some modules added, removed, or configured differently to cope with slight hardware differences between the bodies. The only speed improvement would be if they migrated to a (compatible) faster computing system in the DS2, but that's something embedded systems designers only do if the sales put a gun on their heads, that is, if there's a direct impact for the customer that can be advertised. And there is none here: all speed specifications (as advertised) are unchanged from the DS. Memory increase could also improve some image processing algorithms, but the amount of internal memory also seems to be unchanged (8 JPEG, 5 RAW image buffer). No wonder Pentax waited for the official retirement of the *ist DS to release the firmware update 2.00 (which was probably more or less ready from the day the DS2 was out, if my assumptions are right about the relation between the DS, DL and DS2 firmwares). (Just my 2 cents) Patrice
Re: istDS v istDS2
On 12/14/05, Patrice LACOUTURE (GMail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: AFAIK, apart from this bigger screen, the only hardware difference with the DS, that could not be reflected in the firmware upgrade 2.00, is the retractable autofocus coupling, for manual AF retouching. IMHO, this one is a much more useful improvement (although I haven't seen this one working). (Just my 2 cents) Patrice Retractable autofocus coupling? Could you give us more details? -- Best regards, Alex Sarbu
Re: istDS v istDS2
Shel Dave - I've not noticed a major difference between the two in either speed or function and if there is a difference in battery life with the larger screen it hasn't been bad enough to slap me in the face (at least at this point). The larger screen is nice, and is somewhat easier on my 64 year old eyes, though. When I bought the DS2 I wanted to buy locally and had there been a DS body only available for a lower price, I would have been very happy to buy it instead. For a brief time the Auto ISO available via the function button and continuous AF available in the record menu as well as the Action program were the major differences for me between the DS and DS2, but the recent firmware upgrade for the DS puts these in place so, with the exception of the larger screen the DS pretty much becomes a DS2. The *bells and whistles* are nice for quick family photos, but I find that for *serious* pix like weddings and portraits I revert back to my old habits of either Av or manual everything. -P David Oswald wrote: Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hi Paul ... Have you noticed any differences between the DS and the DS2 in terms of speed or function? Is the larger screen on the back a substantial improvement? Shel One question I would have regarding the difference between the two is whether the larger screen has an impact on battery life, or if any negative impact created by the larger screen has been offset by newer-generation electronic components in the DS2.
Re: istDS v istDS2
Paul, What speed(s) are the SD cards that you're using? Godfrey thought that the DS2 could take advantage of cards with speeds of up to 133X or so, iirc. IAC, if you're using slower cards, you might not notice any write speed difference. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Sorenson Shel Dave - I've not noticed a major difference between the two in either speed or function and if there is a difference in battery life with the larger screen it hasn't been bad enough to slap me in the face (at least at this point). The larger screen is nice, and is somewhat easier on my 64 year old eyes, though.
Re: istDS v istDS2
Shel, You're right in your premise that I'm not using high speed cards. For what I do, the inexpensive (read that cheap ;0) cards have a sufficient write speed. With faster cards the buffer will clear a little faster so if one is shooting lots of continuous action there would be an advantage there and the DS2 might have it over the DS. The faster write speed *may* also manifest itself in a few more exposures during the life of the batteries due to the shorter transfer time from the buffer to the card, but my suspicion is that in the overall assessment the increase in shots per battery would be inconsequential. For my shooting style, there's no real advantage to spending the extra $ for faster cards. -P Shel Belinkoff wrote: Paul, What speed(s) are the SD cards that you're using? Godfrey thought that the DS2 could take advantage of cards with speeds of up to 133X or so, iirc. IAC, if you're using slower cards, you might not notice any write speed difference. Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Sorenson Shel Dave - I've not noticed a major difference between the two in either speed or function and if there is a difference in battery life with the larger screen it hasn't been bad enough to slap me in the face (at least at this point). The larger screen is nice, and is somewhat easier on my 64 year old eyes, though.
istDS v istDS2
Hi Paul ... Have you noticed any differences between the DS and the DS2 in terms of speed or function? Is the larger screen on the back a substantial improvement? Shel [Original Message] From: Paul Sorenson Used to use a MZ-S with a ZX-7 for backup, now pretty much moved to a DS and DS2.
Re: istDS v istDS2
Shel Belinkoff wrote: Hi Paul ... Have you noticed any differences between the DS and the DS2 in terms of speed or function? Is the larger screen on the back a substantial improvement? Shel One question I would have regarding the difference between the two is whether the larger screen has an impact on battery life, or if any negative impact created by the larger screen has been offset by newer-generation electronic components in the DS2.
Re: istDS v istDS2
Good questions ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: David Oswald One question I would have regarding the difference between the two is whether the larger screen has an impact on battery life, or if any negative impact created by the larger screen has been offset by newer-generation electronic components in the DS2.
