Not intending to disparage. Though the list knows my views on the marketing
approach and time/money invested to produce lower-spec'd D's instead of
putting that towards an 'upgrade' model.
I would venture to say that no one could see the difference between a print
resulting from the *ist D and one taken with the K1000...
Tom C.
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: *ist-DS saving zero-byte files occasionally.
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 07:43:58 -0800
The word "lesser" implies a disparagement.
The DS/DS2 bodies offers the same image quality and viewfinder quality as
the D. They have fewer features. But to a person looking at the results,
and who doesn't need/want/care about the D's additional features, they
have advantages. No one can tell the difference upon seeing a print.
In the olden days, the same was true of a Nikon FM vs a Nikon F3. And
people often disparaged the FM as being a lesser camera too. It was stupid
then... Not much has changed.
Godfrey
