CameraLabs K20d review

jms698 · 05-18-2008, 07:32 AM

This was just published.

Pentax K20D review Cameralabs introduction

Overall a very positive review although it doesn't get the highest rating.

No more soft JPEGs

Slight underexposure (which I think is a good thing)
Great high-ISO quality
Great camera body

Negatives:
High price (at least in the UK)
Not as good shake reduction as Sony/Olympus

d.bradley · 05-18-2008, 07:59 AM

They really like their magnesium! Yikes! But how can you argue against the build quality or materials of the K10/20D? Thermoplastic technology, it could be argued, is at least as appropriate in its execution in camera bodies. And a negative point for stainless steel instead of magnesium frame? You've got to be kidding....

Jasvox · 05-18-2008, 08:17 AM

LIke most reviews...fluff for 95% and the other 5% is usable.

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, But one look at the K20D’s images and you know you’re dealing with something special. It really does capture a great deal of detail and unlike Sony’s 14 Megapixel sensor and processing engine, this detail remains at higher sensitivities. And like the K10D before it, the decent viewfinder, comfortable grip, innovative exposure modes, twin control dials and vast degree of customisation makes it a great camera to use in traditional photographic terms.

OK, so who wants a camera that makes is capable of producing some incredible images? Me.

Jason

.

flyer · 05-18-2008, 10:35 AM

They also missed the fact that you can switch ISO in just about any mode by holding the OK button and using the front e-dial. As for convenience, they didn't seem to notice that you can reset ISO to auto or bracketing to 0 with the green button. Overall, the result they gave is not bad, but they seem to have missed on quite a few of the convenience offered by the K10D/K20D. And the K20D was taken at a disadvantage with the longer zoom compared to the other two cameras.

jms698 · 05-18-2008, 11:56 AM

Originally Posted by Jasvox

... It really does capture a great deal of detail and unlike Sony’s 14 Megapixel sensor and processing engine, this detail remains at higher sensitivities. And like the K10D before it, the decent viewfinder, comfortable grip, innovative exposure modes, twin control dials and vast degree of customisation makes it a great camera to use in traditional photographic terms.

vs.

"If these are the things you look for in a DSLR, then we can easily recommend the K20D, but its relatively high price, disappointing Live View, tendency to underexpose and uncomfortable positioning rules out our Highly Recommended award. If you want more effective anti-shake, superior Live View, faster continuous shooting and a bigger or more flexible screen, then there are simply better or cheaper alternatives out there."

* Live View: yes, it is pretty useless; but I don't care, it's not a P&S, no SLR had live view until just a few years ago, they shouldn't make it such a big deal.
* [slight] Underexposure: that's a good thing, helps eliminates blown out highlights
* Uncomfortable positioning: I don't even know what they mean with this.
* Ineffective anti-shake: 2-stops vs. 3-stop in the rivals in a single test run. It's not like the K20d's anti-shake doesn't work at all.
* Slow continuous shooting & high price: true
* Small screen: the Canons' 3" screens have the same resolution as the Pentax screen. The extra size doesn't make much of a difference.

And, wow, I just looked over the noise comparison:
Pentax K20D review Cameralabs noise results

That Sony A350 is really, really awful. The K20d delivers just about 2-stops less high-ISO noise! The Canon XSi is pretty close to the K20d. Still, I think Pentax has about a 0.5-1 stop advantage (and more resolution!).

I totally agree with what Jason said: who wants a "recommended" camera that takes amazing pictures?

me, me, me! (vs. a "highly recommended" Sony camera with an unusable viewfinder and terrible image quality even at ISO 200

)

*isteve · 05-18-2008, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by jms698

vs.

"If these are the things you look for in a DSLR, then we can easily recommend the K20D, but its relatively high price, disappointing Live View, tendency to underexpose and uncomfortable positioning rules out our Highly Recommended award. If you want more effective anti-shake, superior Live View, faster continuous shooting and a bigger or more flexible screen, then there are simply better or cheaper alternatives out there."

* Live View: yes, it is pretty useless; but I don't care, it's not a P&S, no SLR had live view until just a few years ago, they shouldn't make it such a big deal.
* [slight] Underexposure: that's a good thing, helps eliminates blown out highlights
* Uncomfortable positioning: I don't even know what they mean with this.
* Ineffective anti-shake: 2-stops vs. 3-stop in the rivals in a single test run. It's not like the K20d's anti-shake doesn't work at all.
* Slow continuous shooting & high price: true
* Small screen: the Canons' 3" screens have the same resolution as the Pentax screen. The extra size doesn't make much of a difference.

And, wow, I just looked over the noise comparison:
Pentax K20D review Cameralabs noise results

That Sony A350 is really, really awful. The K20d delivers just about 2-stops less high-ISO noise! The Canon XSi is pretty close to the K20d. Still, I think Pentax has about a 0.5-1 stop advantage (and more resolution!).

I totally agree with what Jason said: who wants a "recommended" camera that takes amazing pictures? me, me, me! (vs. a "highly recommended" Sony camera with an unusable viewfinder and terrible image quality even at ISO 200 )

Funny that AP did not notice the poor high ISO quality of the A350.

I dont know why everyone raves about their reviews. They always end up with the same conclusion and miss half the features.

Maxington · 05-18-2008, 04:54 PM

Not a bad review overall, but as usual, they harp on about Live View. I'm really beginning to dislike Live View, its infecting all cameras and reviews and taking up too much reviewer attention for a relatively useless feature. Some valid criticisms of the K20D there, but seriously, Live View isn't a required feature so it shouldn't be a major con.

And does the 21fps burst mode exist? I haven't seen it mentioned as a pro in any review that I can recall. Not that it's that useful but its unique.

Torphoto · 05-18-2008, 10:32 PM

How can the give the 350 a hi recommendation and not the K20D? that and after having a 40D the K20D is much better made. Sorry but Bias is written all over this.

*Lance B* · 05-19-2008, 12:17 AM

Originally Posted by Torphoto

How can the give the 350 a hi recommendation and not the K20D? that and after having a 40D the K20D is much better made. Sorry but Bias is written all over this.

Couldn't agree more.

What does this mean from the article?:
"Uncomfortable positioning"

ftpaddict · 05-19-2008, 01:46 AM

Originally Posted by Lance B

Couldn't agree more.

What does this mean from the article?:
"Uncomfortable positioning"

Priced like a semi-pro body, but entry-level features? I think that's what Gordon was aiming at.

Maxington · 05-19-2008, 03:37 AM

Originally Posted by Torphoto

How can the give the 350 a hi recommendation and not the K20D? that and after having a 40D the K20D is much better made. Sorry but Bias is written all over this.

Image quality seems to be the factor that is weighted least in reviews lately, its all FPS and gimmicks.

JanG · 05-19-2008, 04:22 AM

When I noticed that they gave the Canon 450D the same score for built quality as the K20D I knew what to conclude from this review...

Oh boy! Absolutely ridiculous!

Jan

arthurs · 05-19-2008, 05:39 AM

Hi gave K20d 19 on image quality, that is better than Nikon d300, Oly, E3, Canon 40d, Sony a700 and only matched by Canon 5d in all his reviews..
IQ is the only thing that matters to me so I think it is a good review.

sklathill · 05-19-2008, 08:15 AM

I personally think it's silly to say image quality is everything. It's always a balance of stuff. If the camera gets in the way of getting you to take a picture, then even the best image quality in the world can't save you when you miss the opportunity.

Not that I'm saying that's what happens with the K20D. At least, I hope not, since I should be getting mine this week. I rather like how the original K10D handled...

lol101 · 05-19-2008, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by d.bradley

They really like their magnesium! Yikes! But how can you argue against the build quality or materials of the K10/20D? Thermoplastic technology, it could be argued, is at least as appropriate in its execution in camera bodies. And a negative point for stainless steel instead of magnesium frame? You've got to be kidding....

Exactly!

When you go out under tough conditions,will the magnesium alloy keep the dust or rain out of your camera?

I have the 30D and shoot sometimes with a 5D but if weather is uncertain: I reach for the K20 and having good friends with 40Ds, I know they'd trade their mag' alloy bodies for a few rubber toric seals in these conditions....

The CF compartment door on my 30D positively wobbles against my palm when I shoot...

K10/K20 are obviously better constructed than their Canon equivalents, you just have to use them side by side to see it.

Same for the supposed lack of ISO button: ever heard of the OK button or dial customization?

Try switching ISO in portrait mode with the grip on a 40D...

Other than that, their analysis of the cameras respective IQ are sound and their remarks about poor LV or overall relative low speed of the K20 also.