Originally Posted by k100d 
thanks for the review khardur!
just wondering why you chose to get a K200d instead of a K10d
well, I know all the pluses the K10D has over the K200D, notably the viewfinder, better buffer, and it has the hyper program mode, and multiple exposure capability. But only the bigger viewfinder is something I would like /use. multiple exposures I'd rather do in post processing, to be honest, (control freak)
But as far as my reasons, it has more to do with the type of photography I do mostly, landscapes. Supposedly the K200D has a more updated PRIME processing engine, expanded dynamic range mode (if it proves useful, could be very nice for certain landscape scenes that prove difficult) but as I said I really haven't had a good chance to test it out.
Capturing B&W images in-camera with pretty nice simulation of color filters is awesome too. Not that you can't do that in post-processing just as well, but doing it in-camera, as I said above, allows you to see what your final image is going to look like, not get it back to the computer and think "oh, that really didn't work as well as I thought"
other things that made up my mind: white balance settings you can tweak (though i don't know if this was a feature of the K10D or not) - AA batteries - I have a bunch of NiMH rechargeables, and if I run out in a pinch I could always grab a package of lithium AA's. *shrug* Plus there's something to say about when I explain to my wife about "this camera just came out" as opposed to "they are discontinuing this model, I'm going to run out and buy one before it disappears from the shelves".
So in a lot of aspects, the K10D is still a great buy as well, and it's cheaper for sure. But for what I'm planning on using it for, the K200D is just as good, and has a few features that might prove more useful to my style of photography.