PDA

View Full Version : ist D/Ds/Dl/Ds2/Dl2



Rhys
04-12-2006, 04:34 AM
Is there any difference in photo quality between these at normal or high ISOs?

Aside from the D taking CF and the others, SD, is there any other big difference?

coldrain
04-12-2006, 06:16 AM
The DL is different from the DS and D. The DS and D have very soft photos, Pentax chooses to not sharpen them and leave that to the photographer during post processing. This explains also why the D and DS seem to have such a lower resolution than the D70 and D50 (and 5D/7D) which use the same Sony 6.1mp sensor.

In direct comparison with a 100mm pentax macro lens:
822/823 line pairs per image height for the *istDs (ISO100/400)
908/905 line pairs per image height for the *istDL (ISO200/400)

This also has an effect on noise:
69.4/57.0 S/N for the *istDs (ISO100/400)
49.5/40.9 S/N for the *istDL (ISO200/400)
The D:
60.4/39.1 S/N for the *istD (ISO100/400)

So, quite big differences there.

The *istDs and DL have better white balance accuracy than the *istD: 1 and 2 DeltaRGB versus 6 DeltaRGB.

Concerning camera differences: The DL misses the biggest plus of the DS, the penta prism viewfinder. It also is slow starting up: 2.8s compared to 0.5s.
The D (startup time 0.7s) has no special programs like "landscape" and "portrait", it is aimed at a more professional user with a hyperdrive program like the Z1. The Ds and DL do have these programs, but lack the hyperdrive.
The DL has only 3 AF points. The D has an 1.8" LCD like your XT, the Ds 2", DS2/DL/DL2 2.5". The D has separate wheels for aperture and shutterspeed (like an EOS 20D/30D/5D, D70s/D200), the Ds/DL only one with a button to operate aperture like your XT and a D50.
The D lacks warning for areas that are clipped in highlights, the Ds/DL have that.

The *istDL feels plasticy and its controls feel very cheap (not "responsive", strange pressure point you know from cheap devices), the D feels quite a bit better.

All in all the D and Ds are the better cameras if you do not mind post processing every photo.

Rhys
04-12-2006, 06:32 AM
I know the D saves in TIFF - about the only camera that does this. I don't know if it's still available though.

How are they (all models) in terms of focussing speed and accuracy on static and moving subjects?

jeisner
04-12-2006, 07:08 PM
First Off the figures coldrain gave regarding apparent lower resolution compared to the Nikons are accurate for in camera JPEG at default settings for the DS.. But for the D as the difference was actually less, they did go for a slighty less sharpened JPEG look on the D and DS, but the resolution of the D's JPEGs was higher than the DS.. So can't quite group them together exactly..

Here you can see the D compared to the Nikon D100

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxistd/page17.asp

That said for the DS or the D for that matter I personally I have always used RAW (regardless of JPEG resolution), so those figures for me are somewhat irrelevant. Tests that I have seen show when shooting RAW resolution is very similar to the Nikons.. Just wanted to point that out ;-)

With software like Bibble or C1 (I prefer bibble) post processing 'every photo' is not an issue, you can simply batch process the lot (afer flicking through them to see if any shots need individual attention)... My best friend has a 20d and he 'post processes every photo' in the same way with bibble, it is nothing to do with JPEG resoltuion, RAW is a MAJOR advantage of DSLRs you have much more lattitude to fix any problems with a RAW file versus a JPEG..


I know the D saves in TIFF - about the only camera that does this. I don't know if it's still available though.

For myself I think there is little advantage in TIFF on the D as the RAW files are actually slightly smaller and you can make TIFFs out of them anyway.. Though I guess if you don't want to process RAW then I suppose you could use TIFF to get better resolution than the JPEGs...

The D is still available at some places, it is not in production, but I see stock from time to time.. Obviously stock here in Australia doesn't help you though, but bhphoto have stock ATM at US$899..

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=297466&is=REG&addedTroughType=search


How are they (all models) in terms of focusing speed and accuracy on static and moving subjects?

They are all accurate in that regard, except maybe in very low light where the D is more accurate (though I find low light focusing partly depends on the lens too)... Focusing speed and so hence tracking on moving objects the D is definitely better than the DS/DL, it has a much stronger focus motor..

The D also has better controls (I like changing metering and focus modes from their own independent dials), lower mirror slap noise, better shutter mechanism, wireless flash trigger, PC sync, and available battery grip... It does only have usb 1.1 vs 2 (dl/ds) but I think it is better practice to use a card reader anyway..

Chilious
04-19-2006, 02:30 PM
Hi everybody. I'm considering to switch to a Pentax dSLR, but I don't know what to choose. It would be either the DS or the DS2. The differences between these two are (at least I think they are) the bigger LCD (2.5" vs. 2"), auto ISO and 19 custom settings vs. 18 custom settings. Are there any differences in picture quality? If not, does it worth it to spend almost 300$ more for the DS2?
Any thoughts?

Rhys
04-19-2006, 05:51 PM
Hi everybody. I'm considering to switch to a Pentax dSLR, but I don't know what to choose. It would be either the DS or the DS2. The differences between these two are (at least I think they are) the bigger LCD (2.5" vs. 2"), auto ISO and 19 custom settings vs. 18 custom settings. Are there any differences in picture quality? If not, does it worth it to spend almost 300$ more for the DS2?
Any thoughts?

I'd go for image quality over anything else. Auto ISO isn't worth having because it could wreck image quality. Custom settings are - again - not really worth having either. LCD size is pretty insignificant too. What we have are a few measures aimed at parting people from their money that add up to about zero. Go for the $300 less. It sounds a better bargain unless image quality is substantially higher (which I doubt).

jeisner
04-19-2006, 08:39 PM
I didn't mind auto ISO as you can set limits on it, to say only go up to 800..

Anyway if you download the v2 firmware from the Pentax website the only difference between the DS and the DS2 is the 2" vs the 2.5" screen... So if you can still get it go for the DS and download the new firmware...

Chilious
04-20-2006, 07:41 AM
Thanks for the advice.
How about the "kit" lens (DA 18-55mm)? Is it OK, or should I go with another one as a "starting" lens? What would you recommend?

WightWalker
04-20-2006, 07:49 AM
How about the "kit" lens (DA 18-55mm)? Is it OK, or should I go with another one as a "starting" lens? What would you recommend?

The Pentax 18-55mm DA 'kit lens' is OK - nothing earth shattering BUT is a good all round lens which if combined with the Pentax 50-200mm DA would provide coverage that most users would want - the latter lens gets good references from many users.

jeisner
04-20-2006, 10:51 PM
The Pentax 18-55mm DA 'kit lens' is OK - nothing earth shattering BUT is a good all round lens which if combined with the Pentax 50-200mm DA would provide coverage that most users would want - the latter lens gets good references from many users.

Yeah the 18-55 is fine, not as good as the 16-45 but cheaper and very useable...

The 50-200 is amazingly good for the size and price..