Is the K200D a Pentaxes Sleeper Camera ? - Page 4

devs66 · 10-27-2009, 07:14 PM

I now have the K7 - But my trusted and well used K200D is still close at hand! The K200D is what sold me on going Pentax in the first place - at the time it seemed the best buy in the price range. Everything else in the price range (Not always feature range) felt like a plastic toy that was about break.

A K200D with an FA50 F1.4 is all you really need to get loads of great shots! You would be limited, but could still have a ball!

Aristophanes · 10-27-2009, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by devs66

I now have the K7 - But my trusted and well used K200D is still close at hand! The K200D is what sold me on going Pentax in the first place - at the time it seemed the best buy in the price range. Everything else in the price range (Not always feature range) felt like a plastic toy that was about break.

A K200D with an FA50 F1.4 is all you really need to get loads of great shots! You would be limited, but could still have a ball!

DP Review and most other review sources said that the K200D was outstanding, in large part because it differentiated itself from the pack with its mid-range price including weather sealing (WR).

So what did Pentax do? They got rid of weather sealing (K-M, K-x)!!

Then, they create a WR kit lens, clearly aimed at the entry to mid-range market!! The only brand to do so.

Baffling. The product line meanders through whims and well-intentioned dead-ends.

Pentaxor · 10-27-2009, 09:15 PM

Originally Posted by devs66

I now have the K7 - But my trusted and well used K200D is still close at hand! The K200D is what sold me on going Pentax in the first place - at the time it seemed the best buy in the price range. Everything else in the price range (Not always feature range) felt like a plastic toy that was about break.

A K200D with an FA50 F1.4 is all you really need to get loads of great shots! You would be limited, but could still have a ball!

between a k-m versus a K200D, I'll pick the K200D anytime of day.

eva2000 · 10-28-2009, 03:29 AM

Originally Posted by devs66

I now have the K7 - But my trusted and well used K200D is still close at hand! The K200D is what sold me on going Pentax in the first place - at the time it seemed the best buy in the price range. Everything else in the price range (Not always feature range) felt like a plastic toy that was about break.

A K200D with an FA50 F1.4 is all you really need to get loads of great shots! You would be limited, but could still have a ball!

Exactly the pair i have - K200D first for 14+ months and now k-7 for past 5 months with K200D as backup

*dcmsox2004* · 10-28-2009, 06:52 AM

i've had my k200d for over a year...had the k100d prior to that.. (also had a film zxl)...
i can say that at this point, i'm very happy with the camera, and realize that the k200d, like people, has it's limitations, and when taken into consideration, will yield very nice pics...
the more i've learned about the camera, as well as exposure, lighting et al... my pics' quality have improved...... all it really takes is patience, and some trial and error...
but the joy is in the journey itself.....
i've considered the k20d, even the k7 someday (once the price drops further)... and who know what pentax will release in the future....
but for now.... i'm one contented k200d owner.................

atown · 11-01-2009, 01:52 PM

I'm looking at K200D or K20D (or possibly K-x) and would like to know the scoop of CCD vs CMOS. I know the K20D is also higher MP, and have heard that the switch to CMOS was for more sensitivity. So at the same MP, what are the advantages and limitations of CCD vs. CMOS sensor technology ? Sorry if this is an old question, I just joined this forum.

**Marc Sabatella** · 11-01-2009, 03:28 PM

There's really no difference at the user level. Both take pictures, but require different supporting electronics and involve different tradeoffs for camera designers. There is nothing you'd be able to tell by using the camera or looking at a picture to indicate whether it came from CMOS or CCD. Many CMOS sensors produce lower noise than many CCD sensors, but there is enough variation from a camera to camera, and the differences are pretty small anyhow, that there is really no reason in the world to make that a factor in your decision.

*cbaytan* · 11-02-2009, 05:11 AM

Originally Posted by Marc Sabatella

There's really no difference at the user level. ........

Many CMOS sensors produce lower noise than many CCD sensors, but there is enough variation from a camera to camera, and the differences are pretty small anyhow, that there is really no reason in the world to make that a factor in your decision.

Dear Marc, one thing: CCD sensors almost always significantly less noisier than CMOS (same level) sensors.

DALSA

Size issue: CCD sensors need several clocking chips, so CCD cameras has to be always bigger than the CMOS (same level) cameras. But CMOS cameras has to have several processing units to optimize IQ. But nowadays image processors are highly developed to handle such a processing needs. And collected all circuitry in one CPU. So CMOS cameras had to chance to be smaller cameras nowadays than CCD counterparts.

Bare CCD sensors will only need a Bayer filter for separating color, and will give better IQ and less noise, CMOS sensors needs a lot of filters (micro lenses thicker AA filters and such) and several more processing circuitry than CCD.

Talking about DR, CCD's always superior to CMOS in DR for sure.

CCD vs CMOS

But this information might not relevant at the end user level as you stated, but you might expect such differences say if K-7 would be a CCD camera . We should expect it would be a bigger and more expensive camera, but less noisier and had better dynamic range. I will not discuss better color rendition of the CCD cameras just because it's highly debatable issue, and I don't have relevant references. But technology is not going CCD way because of very harsh marketing competition amongst companies.

So verdict: CCD sensors produce clearer images but it has to have several additional internal clocks to keep AD conversion allocated. CMOS sensors are much simpler and cheaper but needs additional hardware and software to get better IQ.

To my own subjective eyes: I had a chance to use K20 and K200, my other experience is second hand, from my photo club Canikon pals/gals, and internet resources.

Here it comes:
To me CCD always better in colors (truer and more saturated), with higher dynamic range. I am always a 100 ISO guy praying for 25-50 ISO to come, so I better won't be wiseacre in noise issue.

*cbaytan* · 11-02-2009, 05:38 AM

So am I happy with the K200D? You bet, here is a sample with AL-I kit lens, no PP except crop, resize and save with %75 quality with Irfanview.

peterh337 · 11-02-2009, 11:16 AM

I have the K200D and won't change - it is really great. Significantly better than the *ist I had before.

On this shot

http://s101.photobucket.com/albums/m...hatchepsut.jpg

I had to go down to pixel level (of the full image, obviously) to see the difference between jpeg and raw, and even then it was visible only on some fine line features. Lens: 16-45DA.

The capability to use AA cells is priceless. I use the 1.8V lithium non-rechargeable ones and they last me half a year. Far far longer than the proprietary rechargeables which almost everybody else is now using.

**Marc Sabatella** · 11-02-2009, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by cbaytan

Dear Marc, one thing: CCD sensors almost always significantly less noisier than CMOS (same level) sensors.

DALSA

I'm not sure what sentence or sentences on that site you are interpreting as making the claims that CCD sensor are significantly less noisy than CMOS sensors (I see one reference in a chart that implies this), but it just isn't the case in practice. The article you refer actually does a nice job of explaining a bit of the history and the tradeoffs and the changes over a time, but it also seems rather dated in that its primary source material was last updated in 2005. In practice, in today's world, it just isn't the case that CCD has the advantages it once traditionally had, and the article points this out explicitly.

But this information might not relevant at the end user level as you stated, but you might expect such differences say if K-7 would be a CCD camera

Not if most of the major technological innovation over the last few years has been in the CMOS realm. The fact that most of the recent low-noise champs among APS-C cameras (D90, D300, K20D, and now K-x) all use CMOS right away suggests that assuming that CCD will provide an advantage in practice is just not the case in today's world.

Any, the point being, compare cameras based on actual performance, not based on whether it has a CCD or CMOS sensor. Some CCD cameras beat some CMOS cameras in some areas, and the reverse is true as well.

*cbaytan* · 11-02-2009, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by Marc Sabatella

I'm not sure what sentence or sentences on that site you are interpreting as making the claims that CCD sensor are significantly less noisy than CMOS sensors (I see one reference in a chart that implies this), but it just isn't the case in practice.
.

OK, let me help you find: From the article:
----------
CCDs have traditionally provided the performance benchmarks in the photographic, scientific, and industrial applications that demand the highest image quality (as measured in quantum efficiency and noise)
----------

Second article I gave (link) is lot more clear about CCD's superiorty over noise. Just search for the noise in the article it is searchable
CCD vs CMOS
--------------------------------

More Bla bla about CCD vs CMOS noise:
HowStuffWorks "What are CCD or CMOS image sensors in a digital camera?"

* CCD sensors, as mentioned above, create high-quality, low-noise images. CMOS sensors, traditionally, are more susceptible to noise.
* Because each pixel on a CMOS sensor has several transistors located next to it, the light sensitivity of a CMOS chip tends to be lower. Many of the photons hitting the chip hit the transistors instead of the photodiode.
* CMOS traditionally consumes little power. Implementing a sensor in CMOS yields a low-power sensor.
--------------------------------------

But again these are for bare sensor systems, camera companies prefer to go CMOS for now, and they are developing whole camera systems for CMOS and then struggling with CMOS noise by developing new strategies, with hardware and software. Thats why CMOS cameras noise levels is not seen as much as high comparing CCD systems. But in fact it is, they are just correcting it with mambo jambo. This is why I am agree with your second part of statement, cameras can be less or more noisy, but not the sensors as in your original post I answered.

But still claiming CMOS noise is lower than CCD's might not be a preferable statement..

BTW this time let me ask you, what is your reference about CMOS noise is lower than CCD.

**Marc Sabatella** · 11-02-2009, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by cbaytan

OK, let me help you find: From the article:
----------
CCDs have traditionally provided the performance benchmarks in the photographic, scientific, and industrial applications that demand the highest image quality (as measured in quantum efficiency and noise)

Key word being "traditionally". As I said, their source material is pretty old - the most recent being 2005, but most older still. It just isn't the case in practice in today's cameras.

Second article I gave (link) is lot more clear about CCD's superiorty over noise.

You mean, the superiority it had in *2001* when that article was written. As it says at the bottom of the article, "over time, this stark distinction will soften ... but this process will take the better part of a decade". And indeed, that sentence was written the better part of a decade ago!

It's still true that for very large, very high end applications (eg, medium format digital backs) CMOS has yet to catch up to CCD - but at the APS-C level, it has.

BTW this time let me ask you, what is your reference about CMOS noise is lower than CCD.

I'm not claiming this - just that for practical purposes, modern APS-C cameras with CMOS sensors tend to be less noisy than modern APS-C cameras with CCD sensors.

*Gr8erimage* · 11-02-2009, 07:57 PM

CCD may be a superior image sensor from a hardware perspective, but CMOS holds too many other advantages. Cost, power consumption, image processing power, video capabilities. The noise disadvantage that CCD once had has been erased with improved image processing of the newer CMOS chips. Had the industry continued to invest and develope CCD's, I'm sure they would have continued to match or beat CMOS's in the noise department. But CMOS's other advantages are what is driving the industry away from CCD. Now that an entry level DSLR needs to have video, CMOS has sealed the fate of CCD.

This being said, I still love the CCD in my K200D.

p0opstlnksal0t · 11-02-2009, 08:21 PM

do you guys mind if i hijack this thread??? been really thinking hard about getting a k-x, but id really like to wait and see a higher end camera with weather sealing and more adjustment options than the k-x has, so ive been looking at a k200d recently, and see that bestbuy has refurb deals going for 390.00 shipped, is this a decent deal for a k200d body?