Re: *ist DS owners - Yay or Nay

[Peter J. Alling]

It's a trade off, the Ds give you a faster cycle rate, with a larger 
buffer, but simplified controls.  The D gives you more control without 
having to resort to the menu.  Hyperprogram and Hypermanual operation 
operation, continuous AF without using the the sports mode.  It seems to 
do less in camera image processing than the Ds as well, though I haven't 
examined the results side by side but others have remarked on the 
default settings being sharper.  The Ds is a heck of a lot less 
expensive, (normally), and much easier to find.

Scott Loveless wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 21:23:58 -0800 (PST), Francis Alviar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 

I'd like to ask *ist DS owners regarding their
experience with this camera so far.  Yay or nay?  Any
problems encountered?  Ease of use?  Any feature you
wish it had?  Satisfaction so far?  I'm at the stage
where I can finally (although barely) afford a DSLR
and want to get owner's opinions on the camera.  Thank
you very much and hope to hear from the group.
Francis M. Alviar
   

I'd like to modify Francis' question a bit if no one objects, as I'm
in a similar situation.  I've been weighing the D vs. DS.  For the
price of the D body, I can get a DS and a decent lens, such as the DA
16-45/f4.  So it comes down to this:  Do those of you who own a DS
ever find yourself wanting a D, and do those of you with the D feel
you could live with the DS?  Why?
 


--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. 
During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings 
and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime.
	--P.J. O'Rourke