Camera Review: Pentax *istDS
by Vuk Vuksanovic
Introduction to the Pentax *istDS: The prince of affordable DSLRs
Just when you thought only a famous, demented rock star could get away with an
unpronounceable name, a camera company known as Pentax comes along with the *istD
and then follows up with the *istDS.
Editorial note for the less pop culturaly aware - Prince (a well known
rock star) once changed his name to 
One month before I sat down to compose this review, the tedium of scanning
colour slides made me head out yet again to a couple of our big camera shops in
Toronto to see if I could finally persuade myself the Nikon D70 viewfinder really
wasn't that awful after all. I couldn't. Another big company's offering at the
price point did little more for me (though I was actually somewhat relieved:
didn't relish learning to cope with the ergonomic regression of lenses with no
aperture ring). In an age when marketing departments have so much say, the
calculated absence of critical 50-year-old technology shouldn't come as much of a
surprise. It's pretty much common knowledge these days that a serious problem
with entry-level digital SLRs is how very little of the budget finds its way to
the viewfinder, which I maintain is one of the handful of body features to
approach anything resembling a sine qua non of successful camera design:
if you can't see clearly what you're shooting, how can you shoot clearly?
Before Spilling the Ink
(50mm, f/1.4)
In response to my disappointment, the salesman suggested I look through an
*istDS and I confess I did so only because it was there. Although I own more
camera brands than I really need and have fairly reasonable impressions of a few
others, until recently, I was perfectly clueless about Pentax and generally
dismissed the brand as something reserved for starving art students. So, when I
brought this improbable contender up to my eye and saw how much better the view
was, it was obviously with mixed feelings. While still below a film-based SLR,
the finder was certainly/miraculously quite acceptable, but all enthusiasm was
quickly nipped in the bud by scepticism concerning the sort of lenses I'd be
bound to. As I said, I really had no clue.
Fortunately, I decided to share my experiences in one of the
photo.net forums and things spiralled
quickly to a brisk education that included a pair of very informative articles on
Pentax lenses by Mike Johnston. The universal lauding of the 50mm f/1.4, and
similarly high praise for the recent Limited Edition lenses, was more than
enough to put me at ease. I soon found myself back at the shop negotiating a
trial purchase of the *istDS with 30-day return option.
Technical Specifications
A short list of the basics...
- Lens Mount: Pentax KAF mount (compatible with KAF2, KAF and KA)
- Shooting Modes: Manual, Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority, Program (and a
few strange ones)
- Focal Length Multiplier: 1.5
- Viewfinder: Pentaprism with Natural-Bright-Matte focusing screen
(split-screen available as custom option)
- ISO Options: 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200
- Effective Pixels: 6.1 million (6.3 million sensor photo detectors)
- Sensor size: 23.7 x 15.5mm
- Sensor type: CCD
- Power Source: 4 AA-sized batteries or two CR-V3 Lithium batteries
- Shutter Speeds: 1/4000 to 30 seconds and Bulb
- Storage Medium: SD memory card
Yamon Drion: Urban Digital Colour Test Chart
(43mm, f/1.9)
The *istDS will store images as either RAW or JPEG files. Theoretically, the
RAW format offers higher resolution, but you may not find this to be the case if
using the software Pentax supplies for conversion, which introduces a
heavy-handed etching to dark edges and an excessive amount of noise that
manifests itself in the form of red pixels. A week or so into my review, an
updated version was released (along with a firmware upgrade for the camera) and,
while matters did improve, I still found results fell somewhat short of the mark.
If you can afford the luxury, the best strategy is importing through Photoshop
CS. Otherwise, best to stick to direct JPEG, which is what the Pentax RAW
converter turns the file into anyhow?though I'm still puzzled as to why, with
benefit of full computer, it can't perform as good a job as whatever operates
inside the camera.
Ergonomics
My initial impressions of the camera were so positive and my enthusiasm so
obvious that a friend of mine far away in New Zealand just couldn't wait for the
final verdict and purchased the Pentax on impulse. His review goes straight to
the point: "I love my *istDS, it handles just like an SLR should with the
convenience of digital image storage."
As you may be starting to suspect, in spite of the fact that I'm a decade
younger than one of my favourite (and sharpest) lenses, I do tend to favour a
more traditional approach to photography. Given my shooting style, anything
beyond the 3 simple things a camera actually does (focus, aperture, shutter
speed) is unnecessary and divorces me from a process I enjoy, a process I like to
maintain full control over. Against such a backdrop, it's quite remarkable how my
first stroll about town with a modern technological marvel went off as smoothly
as if I'd been using the digital Pentax for years.
Sid Reichmann Polishes New Stone for the Young Ms.
Hilton
(43mm, f/1.9)
Not only does the *istDS fit very nicely in one's hands (not too small, not
too big), all the controls seem to be exactly where you'd want them. Ironically,
what gave the game away was my instinctive flipping of thumb toward a
non-existent advance lever. I even forgot the memory card one day, having
proceeded out of the house under the routine, absent-minded confidence of knowing
there was always film in the camera bag. Such an oversight never materialized
with my first digital and the slip-up is an enormous compliment to Pentax. I
wonder what the marketing department would make of this.
One minor technical complaint would be that use of the aperture ring is
disabled by default and requires some hunting in the back pages of the manual to
figure out where enabling is buried in the menus. Not sure why really, given that
the function doesn't interfere with use of dial-controlled aperture on lenses
without a ring.
Street Shooting
The intuitive, rapid handling of the *istDS, combined with its fairly compact
size has made more than one of us wonder about the possibility of street/candid
photography. Although a bit noisier (audible noise, not pixel noise) than a
rangefinder, this DSRL isn't really much more intrusive. Theory aside, the camera
was both capable and enjoyable to use in this context; if you can believe it, I
even felt at ease leaving my Leica M6 at home during most of the trial. Given the
high rate of misses when you're chasing (and, in my case, routinely missing)
decisive moments, the zero cost of digital capture is also a
huge bonus.
Winter Beach
(43mm, f/1.9)
On the downside, street photography typically works a lot better in black and
white (it's difficult enough to compose under the best of circumstances without
having to worry about harmonious colour interactions) and I'm still not entirely
convinced of the digital aesthetic here. There is something I see in my film
shots that doesn't quite transpire in a desaturated digital capture
and you can see it in this comparison (click here). Cultural
bias? Perhaps. For now, let's just say the jury's still out on this artistic
point.
Posed Shooting in Ambient Light
One of the things I do fairly often in winter is indoor portraits and other
posed shots of people illuminated by window light (there's not much choice in
Canada, unless you can make a case for frozen red noses). Even with some very big
windows, it means I'm often working at f/2.8 or f/2 or worse and, with such wide
apertures, precise focusing becomes critical. Given the additional pressure of
not making the ?model? hold poses for an unnatural amount of time, I did find
things tricky with the *istDS. Feel free to jump all over me for dismissing
auto-focus, but I strongly suspect the available split-prism screen (my first
choice with film SLRs) would have been far preferable.
Lenses
For me, any camera system truly begins with the glass. In fact, over the past
few years, I've twice purchased a lens well ahead of acquiring a body to mount it
on. That said, I'm not one of those who needs the arsenal of a dozen primes just
to get going. My film shooting is mainly through the incredibly cost-effective,
manual-focus 50mm lens (with a trusty 90mm tele-photo for balance), so I brought
no unwieldy legacy to the table here: if a new DSLR wouldn't take one of the
three brands of SLR lenses I owned already, it was no big deal to buy into a
fourth. In fact, the gear-fetishist in me was looking forward to the possibility
of even more variety. My major concern at the outset was whether Pentax had
something I'd be happy with.
Golden Hour Pears
(28mm, f/2.8)
After a bit of research and considerable help from the photo.net community, I
eventually landed a Pentax 50mm f/1.4 from the
photo.net classifieds, borrowed an
85mm f/1.8 from a fellow member, and Pentax Canada was kind enough to provide me
with a 43mm f/1.9 Limited for this review. Until these transactions were
completed, however, I needed something to play around with on the new camera (no
kit zoom for this purist), so I picked up an old second-hand M 28mm f/2.8?the
(1.5X) conversion/crop to 42mm put the lens within a range I'm quite comfortable
with. The construction was solid and the feel of the hefty focusing ring so
delightful, I immediately/dangerously forgot all about stuff like recharging
batteries (see memory card anecdote in previous section). The photos I shot
during these early days seemed just a touch soft but, before the other lenses
arrived, I really had no proper reference and, to tell you the truth, it really
wasn't anything to lose sleep over.
Family in Sandals
(43mm, f/1.9)
Shortly after the courier delivered the FA 43mm Limited (a modern,
auto-focus lens), the only tossing and turning at night was from worry over how I
was going to afford a new digital camera and complete set of
Limited lenses?fortunately there are only 3, each with its own eccentric
focal length (31, 43 and 77mm). On this occasion, you can actually believe the
hype. Quite apart from being remarkably sharp, there's a special luminescence
about this lens which I typically associate only with the sort of quality one
invariably gets with Leica. It is not easy to make something both precise and
contrasty while at the same time remaining delicate and full of nuance. On the
downside, in extreme situations, the bokeh can be rather angular, though
certainly not image-breaking. I would also have preferred a focusing ring that
wasn't so slim, yet I appreciate most users will be operating in auto-focus mode.
(Note to collectors: the lens is such a beautiful physical object, I was tempted
to slip in its portrait instead of the picture above.)
Grace
(50mm, f/1.4)
A few days later, the legendary 50mm f/1.4 made it all the way from Florida
and Pentax scored again. As with the 28mm f/2.8 described above, this was another
old-school manual lens: well-built with purposeful handling. In terms of image
rendition, if pressed to make a big deal of differences from the 43
Limited, the first impression I'd offer is that it's a bit more direct or
straightforward: just as sharp, but with a pinch less sparkle and lyricism. In
terms of bokeh, however, the 50mm f/1.4 is the clear winner and I'd also say it
was the more ?punchy? of the pair. Ultimately, it would be nice to own both these
lenses.
Three Moon Exile
(85mm, f/1.8)
I'm not quite sure why, but I didn't expect much from the 85mm f/1.8. Perhaps
because the owner, who was kind enough to let me play with it for a few weeks,
paid almost nothing for the lens at a camera show. This short tele-photo
definitely surpassed my expectations and in many ways performed like a longer,
albeit less dramatic, version of the excellent 50mm f/1.4?definitely of the same
family, definitely a good thing. The picture I've posted as an example is
currently my favourite of the trial period. Also, once again, outstanding
construction and the f/1.8 speed is a big bonus for a lens of the length (~128mm
on the *istDS). Hats off to Pentax for providing full compatibility with their
vast back-catalogue of bayonet-mount glass. In hindsight, there was really no
need for my initial worries.
To wrap up the section, I'll mention that, along with the 43mm Limited, Pentax
Canada did also send the 18-55mm ?kit? zoom for this review. As with most
inexpensive zooms, the sharpness wasn't up to the standard I am used to and I
cannot recommend this lens.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
- Ergonomically outstanding and a delight to use
- Worth repeating: ergonomically outstanding and a delight to use
- Viewfinder better than those from competitors
- Sensible price
- Option to install split-prism focusing screen
- Compatible with both modern and old lenses
- The resolution of a 6MP camera
Weaknesses
- ISO 200 as minimum?I can't help wondering if ISO 100 would be even
better
- Software for RAW conversion needs improvement
- Manual focusing can be tricky in high-pressure situations
- Poor sharpness of kit lens
- Sensor may not be perfectly aligned with viewfinder
- The resolution of a 6MP camera
Photographic Odds and Ends
Click here to see the shots that didn't make it
into the review.
Where to Buy
Purchasing from these vendors via these links helps support photo.net
(?) Copyright 2005 Vuk
Vuksanovic
Add a comment
Notify me of comments
