The *ist D.

About two years ago, I was given an *ist D as a going away present--and off to college I went. I've

kept my camera close this whole time: I've shot a wedding, portraits for friends, and even the

occasional scholastic event. The thing is... I've been looking at pin-ups of the Canon 1Ds Mk III in

secret. The *ist D seems behind the times now, and I'm considering my options. Should I buy another

camera?

 

I am nearing graduation, and I'm considering doing freelance photography for a living. Is the *ist D a

camera I could use toward professional ends with a little effort? Should I just buy new lenses, a simple

lighting system, and give my *ist D another chance? Or should I sell my *ist D, lenses, and

accompanying speedlight for a cash advance toward a new DSLR system altogether? Let it be known

that money is an object--I would likely stick to the 500-600 dollar range.

 

Cheers.

*istD was the top of the line Pentax camera few years back. It still has features that you will not find in most of the entry level DSLRs (full TTL support, pentaprism). Of course now, you can get K20D (current top of the line Pentax camera) with more than double the megapixel count, bigger LCD, shake reduction, etc. I would say that Canon 1Ds Mk III beats istD because it is just more professional camera. Though if you upgrade your istD to K20D, you can keep all your lenses and even old ones will have the advantage of shake reduction. This does not apply to most of the other DSLRs today. Another plus of Pentax system is that if you are serious about photography, for the amount you spend on 1Ds, you can get at least two Pentax bodies or keep the istD as a backup and invest the money in lenses. I guess the only area Pentax is weak at is the autofocus. Like I mentioned above the all lenses shake reduction, backwards lens compatibility and features/price ration can't be beat.

 

Of course you should rent both cameras and try them out at home before spending big $$$.

 

Good luck and keep us posted on what choice you made.

You can produce fine images with the *ist-D. Is there something you want to do that this

body is incapable of? If not, will a $600 camera do what the *ist can't? Spend your money

on some GOOD glass and other accessories. There is more to life than chasing

megapixels.

I would start out with the *istD and then add a K20D or the replacement, depending on the timing. The *istD will do a fine job and with the TTL flash and lens support as well as the high ISO shooting, you can take great pictures with this camera and do fine enlargements. Maybe look for an AF400T or AF500 FGZ flash for more power if you need that and fine the best glass you can afford. As the funds permit. this will still make an excellent second body when you go to the next model.

Glass will make more difference right now than a new body and for the $5000 plus you'd spend to just get started on a Canon or Nikon system, you could have a great setup ready to go now with less $$$ outlay.

$500 to $600?

 

There's the rub.

 

You won't even get a decent body in another system for that price.

 

If you are considering freelance, you should really have a backup body as well. For the price range you are considering, here are some options:

 

Option 1:

Freelance/semi pro - need flash for the strobist approach

$300 to 350 - a backup body, used.

--- probably either another *ist D, or perhaps an *ist DS - both will maintain pentaprism and TTL flash functionality

$230 - two AF-500FTZ flashes (top of the line flash, but TTL, not P-TTL)

 

Option 2:

Freelance/semi pro - need faster lenses for available light shooting.

$350 - a backup body, used.

--- probably a K100D to gain image stabilization, which will give you an extra couple of stops in low light

$300 to $400 - a faster mid-range lens, used, like the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 or the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8

 

Option 3:

Have flashes, lenses, want better body.

$600ish - K10D.

If all you really want is a better/more current body, then you can't go wrong with a K10D. Good ergonomics and interface. Plenty of resolution, image stabilization, weather sealing, modern batteries, supports all the latest technology (i.e. SDM lenses.) This body is pro (check out the work of Ben Kanarek, he shot the K10D until the K20D came out) and the K10D is more in line with a camera like the Nikon D200, which costs a lot more than 500 to 600 dollars...

 

And you will always have your *ist D as your backup body.

Tim, It isn't clear whether that is your whole budget or your body budget. If body, I don't think you're going to do better than K10D in that price range, and you'd be able to keep your *ist D as a very capable backup. Also, what glass do you currently own? Since you don't specify what you're planning to shoot, does it offer the flexibility and performance you would want for your intended work?

 

The *ist D is plenty-capable though--you're probably better off spending your money on some of the other things you may need like lighting, accessories, software, etc.

The ist D is the smallest, and only compact metal build pro style control layout model ever made by anyone. It is already being looked upon as a classic. Fine image quality, film-like and without artifacts commonly found in digital models. Especially good in RAW imaging. Features the excellent Pentax Hyper control system. You received a mighty fine gift!!

 

I have other models, but my ist D stays with me. Other posters here who have since acquired the excellent K10D still use their ist-D a lot.

 

Matthew is right, and David has given some very good options to consider. You must also realize that doing some "free lance" work is a very broad term. For instance, doing free lance weddings may require a different range of lenses, lighting, etc. than doing free lance sports.

Tim, i'm about to put my still in warranty K10D, with a spare battery and two SD cards among other extras, up on eBay so i can upgrade to a K20D. I'd rather it went to a forum member and I *hate* dealing with eBay. If you want it at the low end of your budget email me at dmkeditor@comcast.net.

Funny you should put it that way Michael. I didn't want to go overboard on this model but After reading Justin's comments on it last year, I picked one up 8 months ago. The largest enlargements I've done with it is 8x12 but you couldn't tell it wasn't from the K10D or any other "high end" camera.

 

I will be selling the K10D in the next month or 2 for a K20D and plan to look for a second *istD to back up the backup. Since I use it for some paid work, it has been a great investment for all the reasons listed above.

One other thing- the deals that can be found on left over K10D stock are outstanding, and also the price of a new K20D will be coming down within a few months, no doubt by this fall.

Great post, Peter, and a real tribute to the *ist-D!!

Wow Tim, what a general question.

 

So you are looking at pinups of the 1DMIII (a $5000 camera) or the 1DsMIII (an $8000 camera) but have a $600 budget.

 

Hmm, well here is what I say. I still grab the ist D regularly for shooting it has better flash options than the K10D (not that i use either for the flash options, just a notation), and is a pro camera with features you will not find on a $600 camera. the build is high quality.

 

The 3FPS works in RAW or JPEG or TIFF. The buffer isnt big but compare it to the current crop of $600 cameras (in RAW). It is pretty respectable at 5 frames.

 

truthfully the cameras in RAW are not vastly better today than in 2003. they do have somewhat better resolution, mainly at the high ISOs but overall i am willing to bet that if you properly shot an image with the ist d and a $600 2008 camera you would be suprised at the inability to tell the difference most of the time. if you do everything correctly a clean 12x18 shot is very reasonable, i have a few from that camera.

 

the ist is super compact, despite some claims actually smaller than the D DS DL because of the less dished hand grip.

 

it also has mostly 100% external buttons and features. no menu diving. i have always said you can smash the ist d color lcd and use just the top lcd once you get your custom settings figured out. try that with most modern dslr.

 

anyway, as peter said, this will make a great second body. the compactness is why i still regularly grab it. no it is not sexy fast, actually it is like waiting for dry paint to get drier. it is effecient (4AA lithium get about 1,000 shots), compact and full featured.

 

also, the AF motor in the ist D was a beefier version of what is in the DS DL DS2 and K100 series. And probably bigger than what is in the equivalent $600 cameras from the other manufacturers.

 

since it is so slow, you can actually upgrade to SD cards and an Eagle Tec CF to SD adapter. It will not slow you down a bit. this adapter will not accept HCSD cards but all other SD are fair game.

 

New is not always better and the grass is almost never greener. The only way to find this out is to jump in and learn the hard way.

To me, it wouldn't make sense to buy the K10D or K200D as a replacement but, certainly the K20D would be a very nice upgrade and take you 5 years into the future without any problems or wanting for new features.

<p>Thanks a lot, guys. You took a vague 5am post and turned it into something useful.

All in all, I really just wanted to gauge the viability of the camera I have, which is starting

to feel as if it is on the low-end side of things. Here are some details. My setup is pretty

bare right now... the *ist D body, an AF-360FGZ speedlight, and a Tamron 28-75mm

f/2.8. I'm looking to do portraiture, weddings, and various small events. I've been doing

these things for free for the last two years, and since I've turned out a few pictures that

I am proud of--it would make sense to keep going in this direction. I am not in the least

interested in sports photography (glass costs too much, and I'm not sure it interests

me). I like to shoot with available light mostly, but I do use the speedlight fairly

often.</p>

<p>To answer Mathew's question (or <i>"Is there something you want to do that this

body is incapable of?"</i>), it seems that the sensor is a bit noisy (likely from heat)

when it comes to longer exposures. This keeps me from doing night photography as

much as I'd like, but I hear the problem is worse on other cameras. I would like shake-

reduction, but it hasn't been too much of a problem so far. The pentaprism has been

very nice--very bright--but newer SLRs seem brighter. I've seen screen modification

kits that supposedly make things a bit brighter, but I'm guessing using a faster lens

would solve that problem. The K10D has weather seals--I would love to have weather

seals. I've also heard the K10D has sensor dust-removal which could be nice.

Moreover, I have tons of (2G) SD cards laying around, and the *ist D is the only device

I own that takes CompactFlash. I bought two 4G CompactFlash cards to shoot a

wedding, and they are dirt slow. Justin, thanks for the heads up on the CF to SD

adapter...I might need to pick one of those up soon enough.</p>

<p>I guess I just didn't appreciate how awesome the *ist D has been (and still is)--all of

the love shown here for the it has been inspirational. I believe I'll just pick up a new lens

and keep shooting until I can buy a spare.</p>

Tim, if you are going to make a living from photography, you need at least two camera bodys. I always use two at the same time with different lenses, to avoid the hassle (and missed opportunities) of changing lenses. A third backup body is a sensible investment in the future.

 

If your images with the istD are satisfying yourself and - more importantly - your customers, keep it. If your customers expect your equipment to "look professional" aka being Canon or Nikon, you have lost out...

 

My advise - considering your limited budget - would be: keep the istD and add the battery grip (fairly cheap via ebay these days). It gives you more shots and looks more professionally (yes, making a pro impression is part of the business). Then buy a K10 as a second body (also with battery grip, of course). Due to the reduction in price, this should be within your current budget.

 

I personally would not invest in additonal old Pentax flash guns (500, 400 etc.), because the old TTL flash system simply does not work satisfactorily with DSLRs. The P-TTL is much better, though far from being perfect. A very good (!) alternative is a simple, but reliable thyristor flash gun with lots of f-stops to dial in (the original pentax flashes have avery limited choice here, which is the reason I wouldn't recommend them). The Vivitar 283/285 are classics, but of course the basic Metz 45CT would be even better. The thyristor control works independently of the camera and is very reliable.

 

Especially for weddings the key to success is your lighting equipment, not so much the lenses. So capable flash guns should be your next big investment after a second camera body.

 

-- By the way: Don't complain about noisy night shots. These are probably "just" shots for yourself, not for the busines, so they shouldn't influence your choice of equipment.--

 

Lenses for weddings should be build around your current Tamron, which is a good and useable lens. I would suggest to have one more wide angle lens. This could be a dedicated wide angle, like the DA 14mm or a zoom, like the DA 12-24 mm or even the 16-45mm, which is quite cheap now. You would also find a clasic portrait lens quite useful, which could be the FA 50mm f1.4 or the tiny DA 70mm f2.4. For availabe light, your choice is very limited, apart from the 50 f1.4 you could go for the FA 35mm f2 or the 31mm f1.8 limited. The latter lenses would be equivalent to the "standard lens" (aka 50mm) of old film days. If you want a longer lens for available light, it is much more expensive. The most versatile option would be something like a 80-200 f2.8 (Sigma, Tamron) or the pentax 50-135 f2.8 (though I find it too short on the long end). I personally use 85mm f1.4 and 135mm f1.8 lenses, but this an expensive option and probably only a feasible option after your 50th wedding - but by then, you will know yourself, which lenses you really need.

 

There is one most indispensable piece of "equipment", whic money cannot buy, and which you should have plentyful: enthusiasm and creativity. It is a good replacement for lenses and other hardware.

Timothy, there are more than a few of us here who would like to see a new body updating the *ist D--the K20D is close but a lot of us would like something more compact. The AF-360FGZ is a nice enough flash but you may want a flash bracket to keep the flash above the lens when shooting in portrait orientation and to make direct flash less direct (this also looks more "pro").

 

I don't know whether you have run into problems with flash recycle rate with your 360 but in addition to the additional power/range and swivel head, the 540 offers the capability of an external power pack (6 'C' cells if I recall correctly) as well as a built-in F5P port (one less adapter you'll need when flash is off-camera, including when mounted on bracket).

I use mine the for some of the same shooting and I'd recommend you first get an FA50mm f1.4. A very good lens at a great price. Fast and great in low light situations. A nice portrait length lens. I just ordered a Sigma 28mm f1.8 and I think that would be a great second choice if this lens turns out to be sharp enough for this work.

 

Faster lenses will give you a brighter viewfinder but not shockingly so. The dust removal is not a huge deal. it helps a little but generally I still clean the camera every couple of weeks. SR is a nice feature but again good shooting technique can help a lot. I use a tripod for the service and any formal shots anyway so it's off.

Just another note, for shooting night scenes, make sure that you have the noise reduction turned on and let the camera go through the cycle. It will greatly reduce noise in night shots.

 

Also a rare few lenses will not work with this camera. Of note the new Sigma 70-200 f2.8 macro is HSM only and has no focus drive screw. Get a few weddings and events done and add a K10D to the kit.

That very nice Tamron 28-75mm should serve you very well!!

<p>I agree with you all: I need a normal/portrait lens. I tend to stand a bit away from my

"subjects," but not far enough to be out of earshot. This is a strategic move at weddings

and events, since I'm a big guy and don't go unnoticed easily. I've borrowed a friend's

A50mm f2--it seems like everyone on campus has a K1000, so I figured I'd give it a shot. I

love it so far, but it's far from the f1.4 I used to have in my Nikon childhood. I've been

looking into the A50mm f1.2, and it looks amazing. Is it a bad idea to use such a fast lens?

Is it overkill? It might be useful if I ever shoot concerts.</p>

<p>About my flash: it gets the job done, but I am none too happy that it cannot swivel for

portraits. It nearly ruined a set of pictures I shot for a friend of mine. They turned out

anyway, but I could have done better with a bracket and softbox. The battery compartment

is also loose, so the batteries sometimes come flying out in the middle of a gig--not

professional at all. René, thanks for the recommendations in that area.</p>

<p>All in all, it looks like I have reason to stick to the pentax system--not just because of

money, but because it seems like the best system I could choose at the moment.</p>

I Wouldn't opt for the 1.2 simply for speed. The 1/3 stop difference from the 1.4 isn't worth 2x the price and loosing auto focus.The FA50mm f1.4 will do just fine and save the money for more needed items. The choice between the 2 is IMO for a slightly sharper lens with a little nicer bokeh. For the work you outlined, you won't gain much, if anything.