I need convincing!

I am the proud owner of a istds!...my pride and joy.....I am toying with the idea of buying the K10!.............Is the picture quality that much better?.........thats all I'm bothered about,,I dont need fancy gadgets all I want is a camera that will take good sharp shots,will I go for it or stick with my old friend?.................Ken

Well, doesn't your Ds give you all those things already?

I have owned a Ds for over 2 years and recently my dear wife wanted a dslr for herself too. That was an GOLDEN invitation to get a K10D for her (well, OK, maybe for myself) but ultimately I chose the K100D. My reasons were; I have two KM lenses that I frequently use, and a TTL flash I use occasionally, and both of those are relatively incompatible with the K10D so I did not want to replace those. I have never had anything printed larger than A4 (let alone A3) so 10mp was not needed and from reviews I have read the Pentax dust removal system is not effective at all. Plus, I have always well used my previous cameras and have never been afraid to use them in adverse conditions despite them not being "weather sealed" and have never had a mechanical problem in 40 years. And lastly, I have never personally been one to have the latest and greatest bling on my neck (or otherwise) so that did not come into the equation at all. Quality vs. Price vs. Features is my criteria (as it is with most other Pentax owners - otherwise they would not be Pentax owners) .

My point is, my Ds suited ME just fine and the only reason I went for the K100D instead of another Ds was for the anti-shake feature but to tell you the truth, I really haven't noticed a lot of tangible benefit there either.

If I was you and still liked my good 'ol Ds I'd go with the wise George Lazarette, "put you money into good glass instead". For the difference in price you would pay for a new K10D and what you would get for your old Ds you could probably buy at least two surperb lenses.

Of course, like George...I'm a "little bit different" too.

Sue and I changed from the *istDS to the K10D.

If you make large (A3) prints the K10D images are clearly smoother and more detailed. The jump from 6.1 to 10.2 MP does make a difference.

The *istDS is more compact and, if anything, I prefer its ergonomics to the K10D. It is more compact for one thing. In terms of quality it is excellent and can still make A3 prints, but side by side with a K10D shot you will notice the difference. At A4 I wouldn't worry about it.

I've got a DS and a K10D. Unlike John I prefer the handling of the K10D to the DS. Other than that I find the extra pixel count useful when cropping and I've also found the anti-shake quite effective in low light conditions - I was at the Edinburgh Tattoo on Friday night and got some suprisingly good handheld results despite using a fairly slow zoom (16-45 F4 - I just picked up the camera bag without thinking when I should have changed the zooms for primes!).

The main advantage of the DS, which is also a great camera, is that it works with TTL flash - in fact I'm thinking about keeping mine as if I sold it I'd need to get a P-TTL replacement for my AT400FTZ and that'd probably cost more than I'd get the for DS anyway.

as owner of a ds2 and k10d, I can tell you that upto 11x14, you won't see any real diferences.....image quality wise.
I have tt-l flash units that go with the ds2, and some m lenses.
I have a p-ttl flash and some zooms that go with the k10d.
I personally prefer the ds2, but have had more time with it, and it may change if I used the k10d more often...

If you can't get the one you want, use the one you can....you won't be disapointed either way. They're both that good.

What the others are saying is right. In a moment of pure self-indulgence I bought a K10D (I have an ist ds). The former is bulkier and heavier. However, after a day wandering around shooting I think I am clear that it works very well and is extremely good value for money. Oddly enough, I noticed the weight less and less since it is very comfortable in use.

On the other hand, I am sure George is right about spending the money ob good glass. I have two Tamron's, the "Pentax" 28-105 and 28-200, both of which suffer from flare. I also have two Pentax 18-55s (due to kit pricing) - offers welcome for one, mint condition!
So, exactly what glass would I buy in a perfect world, or even this one?

Paul,

It depends, of course, (in this less perfect world), on your budget, and on what you want to do.

But in this age of zooms - some of them very good indeed, I have to admit - I think everybody should have at least one really good prime lens to act as a reference point. And the best reference prime, on balance, is a 50mm lens.

All Pentax 50s are extremely good, so it doesn't matter too much which you buy. If you have the funds, get an FA 1.4. If cash is tight, forgo AF and get an A 50mm 1:1.7.

After that, it's up to you.

G

A lot depends on the type of photographs you take. George says above that everyone should own a decent 50mm lense and that's probably more true now that it was with film - I never used a 50mm all that much in my 35mm film days but it makes a decent portrait lens with the 1.5x crop factor of a DSLR. It's also the cheapest way to get a fast low-light lens, something that is often useful. I have a FA 50mm F1.7 that usually lives in my camera bag - it still doesn't get a huge amount of use but it's small and light and easy to keep with me for when it is needed.

With the DSLR I usually now carry the following lenses - in order of most to least use:

Pentax 16-45mm F4
Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6
Tokina ATX-Pro 80-200 F2.8
Pentax 10-17mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax FA 50mm F1.7

With a 7-element 2x TC those cover the vast majority of my photography, in fact the only other lenses that get any significant use are an FA* 85mm F1.4 (portrait shoots or low-light) and a 55mm F2.8 macro.

With the lenses you currently have what I'd do is to sell the 28-105 and both of the 18-55's and replace them with a 16-45mm F4. That would give you a decent general range when combined with the 28-200 (which I've found quite good on digital as the cropping factor reduces problems with corner sharpness and light fall-off). I'd then try and get a manual focus 50mm cheap (an A 50mm F1.7 perhaps) as even second hand you'll be lucky to get a AF equivalent for under £100.

I asked for advice and I got it loud and clear - thanks, folks.