Why did you upgrade to K10d?

[P. J. Alling]

The Ds is reputed to be a much faster handling machine.  I get ~6 raw 
images shooting the D and ~5 shooting the Ds before the buffer fills.  
The Ds clears the buffer much faster.  It does make a difference.  In 
most circumstances I grab the Ds mostly for other reasons.  That said 
the way I shoot I'd rather have a 6 shot buffer and a slower bus than a 
three shot buffer, (like the K100/110), and a much faster bus.  Right 
now the K10D is on the horizon, but still just a bit out of reach.  

David Savage wrote:
> Six of one, half a dozen of another.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave
>
> On 8/5/07, P. J. Alling <webster26 at mindspring.com> wrote:
>   
>> It's not the tiny little buffer that's the problem, it's the time it
>> takes to clear it.
>>
>> David Savage wrote:
>>     
>>> On 8/5/07, syb vis <fotosyb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> What's your reason to get a K10D?
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Bigger buffer.
>>>
>>> Toward the end of it's primary role, the *istD's tiny little buffer
>>> had me constantly muttering & cursing at it.
>>>       
>
>   


-- 
The difference between Microsoft and 'Jurassic Park':
In one, a mad businessman makes a lot of money with beasts that should be extinct.
The other is a film.
  -- Unattributed