[Aristophanes]

Here you go:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/191322-sale-k...ses-flash.html

Perfect starter system that K-x kit. Add a 50/1.7 for prime practice and you are off to the races. Add a flash and you have a complete starter system.

Starting photography, less is more. In reality you DO NOT need a camera with lots of control options; you simply need the core functions for exposure.

K-x does video, too.

[RKKS08]

I think you have a few details wrong here. The sensor in the K10D is by Sony, not Samsung. The only Pentax DSLR's with Samsung sensors were the K200D and the K-7, both of which outperformed the K10D by most objective measures, although a few people subjectively prefer the rendering of the Sony sensor in the K10D (at low ISO only) despite the fact that it is measurably inferior in most of the ways that can be measured.

The K200D and the K10D are using the same sensor!

[selar]

Again, subjectively, any given person might happen to prefer one camera over another for their own personal reasons, but when it comes to things objectively measurable and that most people can thus agree on, your ranking is pretty far off from reality.

The ranking I presented is not based on my personal opinion, it is based on the camera sensor rankings presented objectively at DxOMark - DxOMark by DxO Labs

As far as who made the sensor, there is no clear evidence as to who it was made by - to quote dpreview: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk10d/ - Interestingly this CCD has slightly different specifications than the Sony unit used in a few other ten megapixel digital SLR's so we can't be sure of its origins

[Marc Sabatella]

You may have intended to use the DxOMark numbers, but as I observed, you've got the details wrong. Actual numbers are

K-r: 72
K-x: 72
K20D: 65 (with a high ISO score of 639)
K-7: 61 (with a high ISO score of 536)
K10D: 66 (with a high ISO score of 522)

As you can see, the K-r and K-x scored identically, as should be expected given they used basically the same sensor. The K20D and K10D score virtually identically in overall performa,ce with a statistically insignificant edge to the K10 but a pretty big advantage to the K20D at high ISO.

As for the remote possibility alluded to by dpreview that someone other than Sony might have built the sensor, there is no evidence to support that, and certainly no reason in the world to believe Samsung did. The press releases for the K20D were pretty clear that that was the first Samsung sensor in a Pentax DSLR.

[Marc Sabatella]

The K200D and the K10D are using the same sensor!

Typo - I meant the K20D and K-7 were the Samsung sensor models.

[selar]

You may have intended to use the DxOMark numbers, but as I observed, you've got the details wrong. Actual numbers are

K-r: 72
K-x: 72
K20D: 65 (with a high ISO score of 639)
K-7: 61 (with a high ISO score of 536)
K10D: 66 (with a high ISO score of 522)

As you can see, the K-r and K-x scored identically, as should be expected given they used basically the same sensor. The K20D and K10D score virtually identically in overall performa,ce with a statistically insignificant edge to the K10 but a pretty big advantage to the K20D at high ISO.

As for the remote possibility alluded to by dpreview that someone other than Sony might have built the sensor, there is no evidence to support that, and certainly no reason in the world to believe Samsung did. The press releases for the K20D were pretty clear that that was the first Samsung sensor in a Pentax DSLR.

There is no evidence to support your assertion that it is a Sony Sensor in the K10D either!

If you order the DXOMark sensor scores and filter by Pentax, you will find that the cameras are ranked in the order I originally posted.

[Marc Sabatella]

There is no evidence to support your assertion that it is a Sony Sensor in the K10D either!

No evidence save for the published specs on virtually review site in the world. While it's remotely possible that everyone n the world is wrong about this, the burden of proof is on those who would claim so etching other than the conventional wisdom.

If you order the DXOMark sensor scores and filter by Pentax, you will find that the cameras are ranked in the order I originally posted.

Perhaps, depending on how they choose to prioritize the different scores. But your listing makes it sound like the K10D was significantly better than the cameras that followed, which just isn't true. Sure, it *marginally* - by a statistically insignificant amount invisible to the human eye - outperforms the K20D at low ISO. But the K20D has a pretty big lead at high ISO, and is a much better camera in many other ways too. You can't just look at one number in a ranking and use that to conclude that the K10D is a better camera than the K20D. It just isn't so.

Similarly, while the K-x might have score some tiny fraction of a point higher than the K-r in one particular score and hence ranked ever so slightly above the K-x, again, the K-r is clearly the better camera in virtually all ways.

[ripit]

If money is tight, rebadged Samsung DSLRs (GX10, GX20) are considerably less on the used market than the Pentax-branded equivalents (K10D, K20D). Apart from the less desirable marque, they are functionally identical.

Lenses? In my experience, current focusing screens are fine for framing, but offer no assists for manual focusing. If you're new to it, I'm not sure I'd recommend getting a cheap manual focus lens - you may simply find it frustrating (and manual focus lenses with automatic aperture aren't even all that cheap). The 18-55mm lens is perfectly good to be starting out with. Good AF lenses to aim for are the 35mm 2.4 and 55-300 F4-5.8.

I would tend to agree that starting out with manual focus lenses could be very frustrating (defiantly a lot more to learn anyway). If you can let the camera handle autofocus and exposure it leaves you free to deal with all the other settings and things you have to learn. Still, if you already have a range covered in auto focus, whats the harm in getting a cheap manual lens to compliment it. Auto focus and auto exposure can blow it sometimes and learning early on how to do it yourself might be of great benefit in the long run. In other words, he has the kit lens so he has 50mm covered in an auto focus lens. He can go out and shoot without worrying about auto focus and exposure with the kit lens, but can also play with the manual 50mm here and there on the side to start learning to use manual lenses. Why not compliment it with a manual 50mm prime? Likewise perhaps a 50-200mm kit lens or a tamron 28-200mm or whatever cheaper auto focus lens to cover up to 200mm and then some manual glass to compliment it and learn?

The 35mm 2.4 and 55-300mm 4-5.8 may be fine lenses but I suspect 200-400$ lenses (including ones others have mentioned) will be out of the original posters budget for a while (maybe they could clarify their future budget). If they do want to stick with auto focus lenses perhaps recommendations for various kit lenses or older full frame auto focus lenses might be more in order. They tend to be a lot cheaper and there are some decent ones. Personally I would want to cover the basic range with auto focus but get full manual lenses to compliment it. If they run across A lenses cheap then fine but they typically sell for a lot more. Full manual lenses are the best way to get very good quality glass dirt cheap (and I'm thinking dirt cheap best fits the op's budget). It also gives them something to learn with because they will eventually run into circumstances where the cameras af or auto exposure will fail (like focusing on an area with no strong contrast and perhaps low light on top of it). Even if you have to rely on the cameras focus conformation rather than being able to focus using the screen, you can sometimes very carefully manually focus and get that AF conformation when the lens couldn't do it itself.

Just my personal thoughts on it as it has not been more than 4-5 years since I had to go through this same learning curve myself and much more recently that I started using manual lenses and realized their capabilities (I really wish I would have started with manual lenses much sooner now that I have learned what they add but still understand the importance of having auto focus to a beginner). I can also sympathize with people recommending 500$ lenses to you when your top budget might be 1/10th that. I used to have more money for lenses but currently am on a tight budget too (kids and daycare are expensive).

[maltfalc]

you shouldn't have any trouble finding a used k-r kit for under $500, which is what i would recommend unless you need weather sealing and don't want to use a rain cover.

[selar]

No evidence save for the published specs on virtually review site in the world. While it's remotely possible that everyone n the world is wrong about this, the burden of proof is on those who would claim so etching other than the conventional wisdom.



Perhaps, depending on how they choose to prioritize the different scores. But your listing makes it sound like the K10D was significantly better than the cameras that followed, which just isn't true. Sure, it *marginally* - by a statistically insignificant amount invisible to the human eye - outperforms the K20D at low ISO. But the K20D has a pretty big lead at high ISO, and is a much better camera in many other ways too. You can't just look at one number in a ranking and use that to conclude that the K10D is a better camera than the K20D. It just isn't so.

Similarly, while the K-x might have score some tiny fraction of a point higher than the K-r in one particular score and hence ranked ever so slightly above the K-x, again, the K-r is clearly the better camera in virtually all ways.

Conventional wisdom? Seriously! Conventional wisdom said the world was flat.

I'll say it again: the K10D was the best camera Pentax made till the K-x came along. And thats not backed by "Conventional wisdom" but a ranking from a well respected source.

[ripit]

you shouldn't have any trouble finding a used k-r kit for under $500, which is what i would recommend unless you need weather sealing and don't want to use a rain cover.

My best guess is it is out of their price range but if it's not I would defiantly spend the money for the kx or kr. I'm using an ist-ds but want to upgrade and everything I have read indicates its worth going to the kx or kr over the older models (at least with some of the aspects that are important to me like low light performance which is one of the few reasons I want to upgrade). If it is out of their budget some of the older ones still do a great job. Even my old ist does pretty good though low light performance has left me wanting.

[twitch]

I'd recommend the K-x, an amazing camera that is dirt cheap on the used market. Even though I own a K-5 I still use my K-x regularly.

[GibbyTheMole]

I currently have saved about $250 towards buying a camera, and I can probably convince my parents to split part of the price with me. Right now, I am leaning towards a used older higher-end camera, such as a K10D or K20D, and was wondering if the K20D's higher image quality is worth the higher price. I already have several Adaptall lenses, currently used on my Nikon F2, and recently picked up a Pentax 18-55 kit zoom for $5. Basically, my question is:
Which camera should I buy, and what would be the best lens that I could get for little money?

I also moved from a Nikon F2 (best 35mm SLR ever made, IMO.) to a Pentax digital setup. If I were you, I'd start by using the lenses you already have & just pick up an adaptall mount for your Tamrons to get you started.

I currently use two K-x bodies & I'm nuts about them. Image quality is awesome, and I find them very ergonomic. Unfortunately, you might have to save up a few more bucks to get one. Both of mine were $300 each on the used market, (body only) and that's about the going rate. The biggest plus for the K-x (and the K-r) in my opinion, is the image quality at high ISOs. Much less noise than any other model, except the K-5. the superior high-ISO performance has allowed me to get good low-light shots that otherwise I wouldn't have been able to get.

Otherwise, you could pick up a nice used *ist DS for $125 or a K100D for about $175 & have money left over. I've also had the *istDS & K100D & they're also certainly very good cameras, albeit with half the megapixels of the K-x and less high ISO performance. The main difference between the *istDS & the K100D is the K100D has shake reduction, which while it works well, I try not to rely on anyway.

Oh - I should also mention that I've installed split screens in both mine and my wife's Pentax DSLRs. They're about $20 each on eBay, and they're immensely helpful if you're using manual focus lenses, which I use a lot of. Coming from an all-manual 35mm system like yours, I don't think you'll have any trouble with your Tamrons as long as you install a split screen. Otherwise, you can still rely on the built-in focus confirmation in the camera. The Split screen just makes it faster to focus.

Really, you're not gonna go too wrong with any model in the lineup, IMO.

Cheers & good luck,
Bobbo :-)

[GibbyTheMole]

Here you go:

K-x Kit, Sigma Lenses & Flash

Perfect starter system that K-x kit. Add a 50/1.7 for prime practice and you are off to the races. Add a flash and you have a complete starter system.

Starting photography, less is more. In reality you DO NOT need a camera with lots of control options; you simply need the core functions for exposure.

K-x does video, too.

That's a killer deal. The K-x does great video, by the way. :-)

[Marc Sabatella]

Conventional wisdom? Seriously! Conventional wisdom said the world was flat.

OK, whatever. If you seriously want to be the one person on earth who still seriously doubts that the K10D Was mad by Sony, and furthermore believes despite direct state,enta from both Pentax and Samsung to the contrary that Samsung Marist, fine, so be it. But please don't spread your fantasy as if it were fact.

I'll say it again: the K10D was the best camera Pentax made till the K-x came along. And thats not backed by "Conventional wisdom" but a ranking from a well respected source.

Only if you believe a 1-point difference in overall score (almost certainly less than the margin of error of the test itself) is more important than the enormous difference in high ISO score between the K10D and K20D, or that this same 1-point difference trounces the ability to record video, live view, or any of the many many other respects in which the K20D beats the pants off the K10D. Or, for that matter, the very many respects in whch the K10D beats the pants off the the K-x despite a higher DxOMark score for the latter.

Again, stick to your quirky insistence that this 1-point difference in one score is more important than anything else, but please don't mislead newcomers by not acknowledging that the K10D is in virtually all ways that actually matter to most people *not* a better camera than what came after. Not hugely worse either, of course, but if you are to recoemmend that people not buy what virtually everyone else would agree are better cameras in favor of a much older model that lacks features now taken for framed and is the signle worst-performing camera at high ISO Pentax (or anyone else making APS-C cameras, most likely) has ever produced, you are going to have to expect others to chime and point out that your opinion is *extremely* far removed from the norm. The K10D is fine camera overall, and does have some nice things about it. But you're doing a disservice to newcomers if you lead them to believe, based on one number from one review site and without looking at the reat of the numbers from that site and without looking at the big picture - that the subsequent cameras are actually worse. So again, don't be surprised when others point out that taken in context, there is much more than one number from one site that should be used in evaluating cameras.