Ah, maybe the digital rebel is why pentax's DSLRS Got worse instead of better after the *istD Came out.
Still there were far and away many many more BETTER DSLRS on the market when ist came Out. Digital rebel being the exception. jco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 11:53 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: The JCO survey The Digital Rebel was indeed on the market when the *istD shipped. It was announced in August and shipped in late spetember IIRC. And everything about the Digital Rebel was lower-spec than the *istD, escept the flash sync. The Digital Rebel is a cheap plastic camera with a tiny wee pentamirror finder, slow AF, slow to turn on (About 3x as slow as the *istD), with a crippled flash subsystem, limited to ISO1600 and a single-wheel interface. It's roughly comparable to the *istDL, except the DL has a superior finder and superior build quality. The only thing comparable between the Digital Rebel and the *istD is image quality, teh Rebel's was as good as any other 6MP body. -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: > Was the digtal rebel on the market when the istD > Came out and what was lower about it other than > Price? > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Adam Maas > Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 10:51 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: The JCO survey > > Canon Digital Rebel (Announced Aug 03, 3 months before the *istD shipped > > in october 03), Fuji S2 Pro (Wasn't replaced by the S3 Pro until mid > 2004). The D70 arrived shortly after the *istD (Jan 04). > > The *istD was comparable to the D100 and 10D in specifications and > performance (Actually the 10D was a bit better than the other two due to > > a higher framerate and larger buffer), which were current models when it > > was introduced. All 3 were mid-range bodies getting sold as semi-pro > bodies (Which none of them were). > > -Adam > > > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: >> Name one DSLR on the market that was LOWER >> Specificed and not discontiuned when *istD >> Came out. Pentax >> Started cheap and at the bottom and worked >> Their way DOWN ( until the K100D and K10D). >> jco >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of >> Adam Maas >> Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 3:20 PM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: The JCO survey >> >> Nope. >> >> It was almost identical to the Nikon D100, and the Canon EOS 10D > offered >> only a larger buffer over the D100 and *istD. The Canon D60 and D30 > were >> lower-end models, as was the Nikon D70 that shortly followed the > *istD's >> introduction. And at the time it was the best-specified camera in >> production at Pentax (The MZ-S, which is the only recent body to be >> better-specified than the *istD, ended production at approximately the > >> same time). The Canon Digital Rebel was introduced about that time as >> well, and was far less camera than the *istD (In fact the original > rebel >> is arguably the lowest-end DSLR ever made, only the earlier Fuji S1 > Pro >> can give it a run (the Fuji is less capable, but far earlier > technology) >> -Adam >> >> >> J. C. O'Connell wrote: >>> The *istD WAS a bottom line model compared to >>> All other makes and models of DSLRS on the market >>> At the time. Just because they later made even >>> Lower specified models doesn't make it "better" >>> The bottom just got lower which was weird. >>> jco >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >> Of >>> Shel Belinkoff >>> Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 11:54 AM >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> Subject: RE: The JCO survey >>> >>> You haven't a clue. The istD was _not_ a bottom of the line model, >> nor >>> did >>> it seem that Pentax was trying to put out "the cheapest possible > model >>> they >>> could ..." After the D came the DS, which was substantially less >>> expensive >>> even though it had some benefits and features the D didn't have. The >> DS >>> was quickly followed by the DL, which was even less expensive, had >> fewer >>> features than the DS. The DS and DL were great successes for Pentax. >>> Shel >>> >>> >>> >>>> [Original Message] >>>> From: J. C. O'Connell >>>> This is the third time I have posted my thery on this. >>>> I think that Pentax's first DSLR (*istD) was trying >>>> To be the cheapest possible model they could hit the >>>> DSLR scene with. In that case, it's a BOTTOM OF THE LINE >>>> Model >>> >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
