Question For Those "White" Km/2000 Owners

shutterpuppy · 09-27-2009, 03:48 PM

Hey All,
I'll admit it, at first I thought I would never buy a white DSLR but the white color is starting to grow on me however I do have some reservations. Is the white body smooth (glossy) or pebble grained like the black models,it looks glossy in the photos I've seen. If that's the case,it seems like it would be more prone to viable scratches and stains. The K X seems like perfect back up to my K200d or maybe it'll be the latter that will be my back up since the ISO is expanded and now has video, seems crazy to pay twice the price for a K 7. I still haven't seen reviews for either camera on Steves or the DP review sites so I'll wait for for a full test before making any hasty decison.

Barry

*bladerunner0427* · 09-27-2009, 06:28 PM

Hey Barry,

I have the white K2000. It has a glossy finish, but it isn't overly bright or reflective compared to say . . . stormtrooper armor. It's an attractive camera and has always gotten praise by people who have seen me use it in public. I haven't gotten a scratch on my camera as I'm always careful with it. I think scratches would be more visible on a matte black camera versus a white glossy one. I was considering replacing my white K-m with the white K-x (or maybe red) since the K-x has added functionality and still uses AA batteries. I'd love to have the K-7, but I don't think I can let go of my addiction to AA batteries. Good luck with your decision.

shutterpuppy · 09-27-2009, 07:02 PM

Originally Posted by bladerunner0427

Hey Barry,

I have the white K2000. It has a glossy finish, but it isn't overly bright or reflective compared to say . . . stormtrooper armor. It's an attractive camera and has always gotten praise by people who have seen me use it in public. I haven't gotten a scratch on my camera as I'm always careful with it. I think scratches would be more visible on a matte black camera versus a white glossy one. I was considering replacing my white K-m with the white K-x (or maybe red) since the K-x has added functionality and still uses AA batteries. I'd love to have the K-7, but I don't think I can let go of my addiction to AA batteries. Good luck with your decision.

You make a good point I forgot about (AA batteries) my k200d is still running on charged Eveloops I used last Christmas. It still amazing to me that the K X list for less than $700 with kit lens, before I had my k200d. I had super-zoom Fujis (s8000fd and s700) both are good cameras but movie mode is so so and high ISO pics (400 and over) are noisy. The K X may not have a top LCD, but I think I can live without it. <g>

*bladerunner0427* · 10-05-2009, 10:59 PM

Before my K-m, I had a Canon S5IS for approx 6 months. It was a jack-of-all-trades. But I wanted something with a better sensor and interchangeable lenses. I can live without a top LCD as I've never had a camera with one. So I guess I don't know what I'm missing. The argument for a top LCD would be that it drains less juice than the main LCD screen on the back. If the K-x had an articulating LCD, that would have pushed me over the edge. I'll wait and see what else comes out from Pentax before buying another camera.

Eruditass · 10-05-2009, 11:16 PM

I'm more concerned if it begins to tint or color unless it is washed regularly or something. I started a thread but it seems to have been misinterpreted!

*bladerunner0427* · 10-07-2009, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by Eruditass

I'm more concerned if it begins to tint or color unless it is washed regularly or something. I started a thread but it seems to have been misinterpreted!

I saw that thread, but I didn't misinterpret it.

I guess because I was viewing a camera forum and I own a white K-m. However, I don't mean any disrespect to those that may have misread your post.

*raymeedc* · 10-07-2009, 09:33 PM

Originally Posted by Eruditass

I'm more concerned if it begins to tint or color unless it is washed regularly or something. I started a thread but it seems to have been misinterpreted!

With all due respect, the only misinterpretation was by "sedberry" (and, apparently, you), who misinterpreted the replies..... every one else was just having a little tongue-in-cheek fun with a query worded in such a way as to invite humorous feigned misinterpretation.

Eruditass · 10-08-2009, 12:18 AM

Originally Posted by raymeedc

With all due respect, the only misinterpretation was by "sedberry" (and, apparently, you), who misinterpreted the replies..... every one else was just having a little tongue-in-cheek fun with a query worded in such a way as to invite humorous feigned misinterpretation.

Honestly, I would have expected you to infer that the exclamation at the end of my sentence meant that I, too, was joking. However, I noticed my thread has been derailed beyond repair and thus I felt the need to infect all other white owner threads.

*raymeedc* · 10-08-2009, 07:46 AM

Originally Posted by Eruditass

Honestly, I would have expected you to infer that the exclamation at the end of my sentence meant that I, too, was joking. However, I noticed my thread has been derailed beyond repair and thus I felt the need to infect all other white owner threads.

Point well taken..... just goes to show how easily the written word can be misinterpreted by the reader's imagined inflections being imposed upon the writer's intentions.