Thought this might be interesting
http://www.pentaximaging.com/products/product_details/digital_camera--*ist_Dl/
http://www.pentaximaging.com/footer/news_media_article?ArticleId=6555158

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05060104pentaxistdl.asp#press

Matt

Dave,
Phew! What a lot of questions!!
Some insight might help...

Firstly, you can't use Adobe Gamma with LCDs Wink It don't have the profile characteristics for LCDs (which are vastly different to CRTs). CRTs have a non-linear response, which is why calibration is more important, whereas LCDs are essentially linear. However, not all software can cope with the LCDs.

So, before you do anything else, download WiziWYG from www.praxisoft.com - it's free . Not difficult to setup a profile for the LCD - should take about ten minutes max. (When you set the R, G, B boxes up, move your head away from the monitor and squint. Use the up/down arrows on the keyboard to adjust each slider, and the Tab key to move between them). However, I have had at least one cheap LCD that I just couldn't calibrate (and not even with a £200 Spyder USB calibration device).

Once calibrated, this should become your default monitor profile (as long as you tick the box at the end of the WiziWYG process). I suggest using D50 (5000K) and choosing between gamma 1.8 (Mac) and 2.2 (PC). I've started using 1.8 gamma (even on a PC) on my laptop as this gives better shadow detail, and I think (still experimental) that the LCD copes with this better. D50 is better with subdued lighting. Once calibrated, don't adjust any controls on the LCD (if you do, recalibrate), and keep the ambient light the same.

I don't actually use I-Match anymore... I decided to stick to keeping all my images on one 300Gb drive. Now I shoot in RAW only, and use Capture One LE and Photoshop CS. It is quite likely that I-Match rips out at least some of the profile from the JPG, or ignores it.

AdobeRGB vs sRGB - if you use a colour managed application then you should see NO difference whatsoever when comparing. The difference is within the data, so to speak. AdobeRGB will give you more "Red" room to play with (I took a sample image over the weekend to confirm this - may publish the results soon). sRGB can easily clip on the reds and leave you with no detail. However, most output devices, and print shops expect sRGB colour space So, you need a process:

* Use "Full Color Management - optimized for Print" in PSE (Shift+Ctrl+K)
* Shoot in RAW or AdobeRGB JPG.
* Edit you image
* Save the PSD file when happy
* When ready to print, you need to convert the image to sRGB colour space, optionally sharpen, and save as a different filename. (Not sure how to convert in Elements, but in PS it is "Image / Mode / Convert to Profile /sRGB...".

I'd also suggest trying another print service I didn't always get on with the Jessops process. I use www.photobox.co.uk - and they supply a calibration print on your first order (or can send one in advance on request). You can compare this with the one online to see if your LCD is within range. Some suggest applying a small curves layer before sending to lighten the image slightly (I have done this, and the prints are excellent).

Hope that helps!
Matt

Page 125 of the manual, under the heading "Selecting the Focus Point (Focus Point)"

You use the [Swtch dst msr pt] in the [Rec. mode] menu. You can choose between auto, center spot, and manual select one of the 11 AF points.
Matt

Here are the links (quite a read I'm afraid, but worth it )
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/12189-1.html
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/20357-1.html
I'm thinking of putting some actions together... I've tried these techniques and they're very good
Have fun!
Matt

Interesting test, John.
However, bear in mind that most compact digitals will sharpen much more aggressively than a DLSR anyway. I have some seriously good Photoshop sharpening techniques that will make the *ist-D & *ist-DS much sharper
I'll dig out the links later
Matt

I think you'll find that the RRP for the 80-320mm Pentax is more than the Sigma Second hand price for the Pentax is around £100 for mint (but the RRP was £300).

Like John, I've never been that happy with third party lenses - I'm all Pentax now (But the Sigma EX range are superb, but soooo heavy and expensive!)

The best thing is to try them out if you can, or save up until you can get what you need

Matt

Yes, the 80-320 is available in black only, but it still looks great in black/silver And optics are a treat

See: http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/index.html
and:
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/zooms/long/FA80-320f4.5-5.6.html

Matt

Not the 100-300, but the 80-320
Matt

Difficult to answer. I had some great shots with the Sigma on an MZ-5, and a Z1. It's useful because it has a macro mode.

However, since going digital with the *ist-D, I found the Sigma had problems with chromatic aberration and low-contrast, and I could never get a decent shot, so I eBay'd it
I now have a Pentax SMC-F 70-210 (which is a superbly sharp and contrasty lens but I find does suffer from flare), and a Pentax SMC-FA 80-320 which is superb. Both these lenses are available second hand at reasonable prices.

Of course, with the Pentax lenses you don't get macro mode, but you do get a sharper, more contrasty image, IMHO.

(Whether I'd see so great a difference on film I couldn't say.)
Hope that helps,
Matt

I can't say for sure - I've never seen the silver and black versions like that.
However, it looks very similar to the early DL lens I had. I think you'll find that the APO lenses actually had "APO" written on the side. My DL didn't have anything

Matt