arbutusq

message continued
The K2000 has the same processor as the K200d and a much easier menu system which for me would be very useful. I realize there are negatives and I am a little concerned about processing RAW images (no experience at all), but it seems as if it has clear advantages over the K200d as well (reorganized menu, speed).

I'm writing you because I noticed on another thread that you bought one and you do outdoor photography (nice shots, by the way--especially nicely composed) where weather proofing might be useful. Do you use the K2000 on backpacking trips? Have you used manual lenses with it? I'm just wondering whether a smaller, less expensive camera that I can learn on might be the way to go. How do you find the K2000? Is the viewfinder o.k.?

Thanks for the time, Luke

Hi arbutusq

I noticed you responded to my thread Quandry on the K200d or K20d. I have been leaning to the K20d because there has been so much praise on the boards here and elsewhere; a Norwegian newspaper called the camera a "coup for Pentax". I haven't been to the camera shop yet (this week) but looking at the dimensions and weight of the K20d I've been astonished. It is huge by comparison to my old Pentax film camera and very heavy. I travel often and lugging around something that big . . . I don't know. And then there's the price issue).
This turns my attention back to the K200d. It is smaller than the K20d, but still "clunky", according to one reviewer, and quite heavy. Of course it's weather sealed which is an undeniable plus. But I was thinking . . . if put that high a priority on weight and maneuverability, why not consider the K2000/K-m? (continued in next post) --Luke