*istD comparable to?

I've been photographing with a Pentax *istD for quite some time, but realize I need to upgrade. Of the newer models which would be the most comparable to the features and functions of the *istD?

Today is the 13th and the *istD is also thirteen years old as of February.

I suppose an awful lot has changed in that time. What is it you feel needs to be upgraded?

Best regards

Ha! Good point. I guess my question is maybe which model has the most similiar set-up / design of functions and features of the *istD, but has the technology advancements and more megapixels. I like the layout of the *istD; Av button option, menu set up, ability to turn the flash off...
I got a great deal on a Nikon D80 from a co-worker and it doesn't measure up in my opinion to the *istD. Using the exact same settings on both cameras and shooting the same subject matter, the images looked less rich in color with the Nikon. I should have never even considered a non-Pentax camera.

Things like the default richness of colours can generally be adjusted according to the preferences of the photographer. Pentax's top tier cameras K7, K5, K3... all have this option both as presets 'Bright', 'Neutral', 'Landscape'... and further tweaked by saturation of individual colours (red, green, blue, cyan, magenta & yellow). I'm not sure if the entry level models support this level of control, but it wouldn't be difficult to adjust in post anyway.

My own experience of Pentax vs Canon/Nikon is that the controls on Pentax seem better thought out, they fall more naturally to my fingers, and often involve less menu diving. This might be somewhat unfair though as it generally those with beginners CaNikon models that ask for help in finding features, while my recent Pentax cameras have been in the semi-pro class. It's a long time since I've used my K100d but IIRC it's ergonomics where also pretty good (certainly beating the likes of the 650D)

I suspect you'll find any modern Pentax has a large number of extra features, but will still feel quite familiar after even a very short while.

I think any modern Pentax DSLR will do what you want and have improved image quality. Amazon have a great offer just now on the K-S1 with 50mm lens but there are plenty of other options if you're looking for something better and are willing to spend on it.

I agree Nikon cameras are hard to find your way around, especially when compared to the sensible layout and menus of a Pentax.

All Pentax cameras have similar operating logic, so apart from faster operation and some new features you shouldn't have much of a problem.

The ergonomics of the Pentax models and less menu diving are appealing features in comparison to the Nikon I tried.
I prefer not to do much post processing of images, which may be an outdated approach.
Guess I will start looking at which Pentax models are within my price range...

K5 and K3 variants are closest to the *ist D in terms of control and build quality. Lots of K-5's around on the used market offer exceedingly good value for money.

Things have moved on a long way since that original *istD DSLR. It would be hard now to even classify it's theoretical position within the range now (does it have scene modes. ... ? .) In its time it was not an entry level model, but nor a full-blown 'pro' model either ... I don't think the middle ground was that clearly defined in those days as there was no mass migration of serious amateurs to digital, that hadn't started.

That category of photographer most likely mainly held on to their high end film systems and dipped into digital cautiously through compacts and the rather earlier 'bridge' types. If it could be remembered and identified who were the main target market for the *istD then it may be easier to map that more directly to a current model .... This is likely to produce a better match than feature comparisons bridging the generations.

Thank you for the information!

The biggest gains if you get a K5 are the increased pixel count which will allow severe cropping, better dynamic range and much improved low-light performance.

You'll notice a huge increase in complexity. I've never bothered with the many of the arcane pages of information in my K5's manual and the intricate menus are like a Greek labyrinth. Returning to my K100D (a bit like your camera) is wonderfully simple.

If you feel the need to upgrade, I'd say get a K5: they're very well priced at the moment. But you'll need to shoot RAW to get the best out of it. In my experience, JPEGs straight from the camera look rather dull.

my first dslr was the ds which in its day was a nice camera i upgraded to the k10 which i loved until it died (RIP)
so i bought a k5 now this is a totaly diferant camera in layout and settings
and to be honist we had a love hate relationship i could never get what i wanted out of the camera so i also bought a k20 which i thought would be good but dont know why i could not get on with so december lastyear i trotted of to a well known camera shop (on here any way)and played with a couple of cameras and ended up buying a k3ii
now you have had the istd for a number off years and i prosume you bought it new
so my advice would be forget what every one says and nip down your local pentax stockist (if they have a good selection )
play with the cameras and take your choice you will be suprised how much they have changed in tec on them and what can be done

regards stu

If you want low light performance the K5 is a big improvement on the K7, but if the K7 is sufficient for you mines currently available for £130 body only (thanks To George tempting me with his K5-II).
I'm in no rush to sell though having a spare body in the draw at work is proving useful

Switched from 1st DL to K-50 never looked back . Everything I need , nothing I don't. Still using 1st DL as back up and have no problem switching bAck and forth. Price wise , it's a great time to buy the K50. Lot of camera for the money