Correct me if I´m wrong [most probably].
And, beforehand, I do own a Pentax digital system [no complains so far].
And, the next lines are not a critique, but a thought.
Over here [http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond300/page2.asp], there are the specs of the Nikon d300. Quite similar, overall, to those of the 40d [somehow].
But there are somethings I do miss when comparing the K10d to those two new contenders.
What the K10d added were somehow "creative" innovations regarding how the camera was used, and taking more advantage of the capabilities of working with digital technology instead of what basically is an upgrade of chemichal history. And understanding that the ISO settings should not be fixed [hence, the ISO priority settings]. The next step would be, in my opinion, to be able to have variable ISO within the very same frame [which should not be that difficult to implement, IMHO].
I miss all that stuff the K10d added up to the basic pro war, and Canikon has missed somehow, or turned instead the head towards finetuning what they already had [which is good, anyway].
But is it enough?
Cheers
