Originally posted by coloseu For example, the K10D JPEGS were always recognised to be kind of soft, but this issue was adressed with the K200D.
More accurate would be to say, "dpreview didn't care for the K10d jpeg, but liked the K200D a bit better". I don't anyone else had any serious issues with JPEG quality from either. It's all pretty subjective.
Quote: In fact, the k-m seems to be even better than the other 2 older models.
No, the noise performance as measured by GordonBGood on dpreview showed it a little worse than the K200D, although probably not enough that anyone would be likely to notice in real life.
FWIW, it's tough to do noise comparisons between cameras unless you have both cameras right in front of you. You can see great high ISO images form the k20D, and clearly less good ones from the K200D - but you can also see examples where the difference isn't actually all that great.
Anyhow, I'm happy enough with my K200D. I have no doubts the K20D is "better" in virtually all ways, assuming you're OK with the difference in size and price - but I wasn't.