And bear in mind that the greater the zoom ratio, the more difficult it is to build a lens of high quality. Which means they are either of poor quality, or great cost, or both.

Unless you REALLY need just one lens, you'll be better off with two or three.

G

The fault is clearly in the camera, not with the card.

Digital cameras sometimes behave erratically when batteries are low. Check you have good batteries.

If it's not the batteries, it can only be an intermittent elctronic fault, perhaps as a result of the camera heating up. You should get Pentax to give you a quote for a repair, but as the camera is several years old it will probably be best to buy a new one.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=p...

The problem with this site is that the reviews are so long-winded that you can't see the wood for the trees. It tells you all about the tech specs, and nothing (or very little) about real-world usability.

Don't get too bogged down in a feature comparison. The Nikon has a top shutter speed of 1/8000, against 1/4000 for the Pentax. So what? I had 1/8000 on my Z1-P. Never used it. Never used 1/4000 either, and very seldom 1/2000.

Of course, if all you do is shoot racing cars at midday in the tropics, and you like to use high ISO settings because good picture quality bores you, then 1/8000 might conceivably be useful.

Far more important IMO are usability issues like a good, bright viewfinder. No marks to Nikon there.

Try to hold both cameras before deciding.

The *ist DS has a much better view-finder than the Nikon, and is smaller and lighter. Picture quality will be much the same. I suggest you try both before making a decision.

Here are some sample digital images for you to look at, from the Pentax *ist D (6MPs):

http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/35mm/ist-d/ex.html

They take a while to download.

I think you'll agree that the quality is adequate.

G

When it comes to digital quality, an awful lot of rubbish is being talked by an awful lot of people.

Pixels vary in quality. The sensor on a 6MP SLR is much larger than the sensor on an 8MP P&S (point and shoot) camera like the Sony, and therefore produces much less noise, and hence the quality is higher. Furthermore, people using P&S cameras tend not to do much or any post-processing on computer, which is essential to get the most from the image.

What this means is that the quality that can be obtained from a DSLR is streets ahead of the quality that most people experience from a P&S, even an expensive P&S.

Serious photographers now generally reckon that a 6MP DSLR is for most purposes as good as or better than a 35mm camera. Some claim that film is still better for black and white. Only a few claim that it's better for colour, especially if you have your pictures processed and printed on the High Street.

There is an argument over contrast, but like all these arguments, it's based on comparing theoretical extremes. In practice, I find no problem with a lack of final contrast in digital, though I almost invariably increase contrast on the computer. If you have seen "flat" digital images, then that was because either the light was flat that day, or the image had not been properly adjusted.

Nearly all professional photographers now use digital, not because the quality is necessarily much better, but because digital is cheaper, quicker, and allows more control. The quality, however, is obviously good enough to satisfy those who are paying for the results, whether they're advertisers, glossy magazines, bridal couples, or whatever.

Exposure is perhaps a little more critical than it is with print film, which is very forgiving. But this should not be an issue for a competent photographer with a good camera!

A zoom on a flash concentrates the beam for a telephoto lens, or widens it for a wide-angle. It effectively makes the flash more powerful when using a telephoto because it is not wasting light outside the subject area.

It's probably a good strategy to wait a year or two before buying a DSLR. In that time, prices will drop considerably, and film will still be available. However, film manufacturers are starting to raise prices because volumes are now so low, so I would suggest you buy in bulk, and freeze it.

Might be an interesting exercise to add up everything you have spent recently, and will spend in the next two years, on film cameras, scanners, film and processing. Maybe that DSLR isn't as expensive as you thought!

George

Fiannor,

You REALLY don't need a built-in flash. They are very weak, cause red-eye, create very harsh light, can't be fitted with gadgets to soften the light, use up your expensive camera batteries, restrict your choice of cameras, are just another thing to go wrong, increase the cost of the camera initially, add weight, and can't be taken off the camera to create a more interesting light from the side. There's probably some other reasons, but that's enough for now. They are unprofessional.

IF, (and it's a big if), you do occasionally need a small, light, flash on the camera, you can buy a cheap auto flash for peanuts. Better though, to get a bracket, and mount the flash to the side.

If it's a small, light, simple (but flexible), manual-focus, camera that you want, then the Super A/Super Program fits the bill.

If you just want a second body, get another SFX/SF1. Very cheap (cheaper than the Super A), and nothing new to learn. Uses all Pentax lenses, and can be auto or manual as you want.

Forget fancy metering systems. You've got a vast amount to learn before those will make the slightest difference to your photography. And many photographers would regard a spotmeter as more valuable than matrix metering. Henri Carier-Bresson never had fancy metering. When you're a better photographer than him, start considering it. Then you'll realise you don't need it.

If money's no object, by all means buy a (P)Z1-P or MZ-S and grow into it. But bear in mind that sooner or later you will wish to go digital (or be forced to go digital by the high price and limited availability of film and processing).

George

PS: The AF240Z is a nice little auto flash with zoom and bounce that sells for next to nothing, and produces good results on any Pentax camera.

Ah, Batty, nice to hear from you!

Pentax's best manual camera at the moment is the *ist DS in manual mode. The MZ-M is not nearly as well made.

George

The Super A is a lovely little camera with lots of exposure options, including TTL flash. To get the best from it you need to use A lenses, but the M and K lenses work fine in aperture priority and manual modes.

Its newer than the M and K series cameras, so MIGHT have seen less use.

The K cameras were built like tanks, and similarly massive. The Super A is the same size as the ME Super, and if you put a pancake lens on it, it will fit in a (largish) pocket.

http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/bodies/A/super.html

George

Many people have problems with flash on the *ist D, and also on digital cameras of other brands.

Pentax is said to have tested the flash system at 400 ISO, and it is meant to work better on that setting.

Some people say that flash works best with newer Pentax lenses, but I personally still have problems with my FA and FAJ lenses.

I have now given up on TTL, and use older program or auto flash units, or full manual.

George