On Feb 3, 2004, at 7:01 AM, Thomas Heide Clausen wrote:
>
> Actually, I've had the occation to fondle an *ist D on a number of
> occations. It IS a nice camera, and it is quite robust and hardy -- at
> least it has that "good feel" of something solid. I would not
> hessitate to
> acquire one. A recent firmware update to the *istD has removed those
> few
> things which people have complained about with the *istD, meaning that
> it
> IMHO is close to perfect: compact, takes my existing KAF-mount lenses,
> robust build......
>
> Be careful not to compare *ist and *istD. That would be like, say,
> comparing OM10 and OM4Ti. Both great cameras, but not comparable
> atall, and
> not aimed at the same audience. They are, however, perfectly adapted to
> their respective audiences -- again IMHO.
>
> I am seriously considering getting an *istD. When jumping on the AF
> bandwagon, I picked Pentax since of the AF SLRs I saw, the MZ-S was
> the one
> closest to what I wanted. Fortunately, to me the *istD also seems
> "closest
> to what I want" from a digital camera.
And Pentax just dropped the price for body plus lens by $300. No trade
in required.
Winsor
Long Beach, California
USA
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|