CNET reviews the K2000/K-m

deadwolfbones · 06-10-2009, 01:57 PM

Pentax K2000 (body only) Digital camera reviews - CNET Reviews

A bit late, but hey... it's a nice little bit of mostly positive press from one of the most-read tech sources.

Quote:

The good:
Very fast autofocus; relatively nice viewfinder; wireless flash and in-body image stabilization.

The bad:
No Live View mode; poor default JPEG image settings.

The bottom line:
Speedy performance lifts the Pentax K2000 above the cheap-dSLR masses, but bad default settings make it an iffy choice for newbies.

ftpaddict · 06-10-2009, 02:18 PM

Who keeps reading CNET reviews? They're about as knowledgeable in cameras as I am in statistical analysis and data reconfiguration.

deadwolfbones · 06-10-2009, 02:25 PM

Yeah, I know. And yet...

edit: on the plus side, it's one of the few reviews I've read that concedes that the image quality is substantially better when you mess w/ the stock settings, so thumbs up on that.

**NaClH2O** · 06-10-2009, 02:37 PM

Originally posted by ftpaddict

Who keeps reading CNET reviews? They're about as knowledgeable in cameras as I am in statistical analysis and data reconfiguration.

The same kind of people that would be interested in an entry level DSLR. Would you rather they read the poop review on DPR? Lots of ppl who are complete newbies (the K2000 target) read CNET reviews for all kinds of things. The fact that CNET may or may not be competent to produce such reviews is completely immaterial.

NaCl( "but I was reading on CNET...." )H2O

ftpaddict · 06-10-2009, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by NaClH2O

The same kind of people that would be interested in an entry level DSLR. Would you rather they read the poop review on DPR? Lots of ppl who are complete newbies (the K2000 target) read CNET reviews for all kinds of things. The fact that CNET may or may not be competent to produce such reviews is completely immaterial.

NaCl( "but I was reading on CNET...." )H2O

I've not met a single person who reads CNET. Geek or no geek.

bladerunner0427 · 06-10-2009, 08:20 PM

"... bad default settings make it an iffy choice for newbies."

WTF is that? I'm a newbie and I don't use the default settings. If one buys a dslr, it's not for "default" settings. One buys a dslr for the custom control of the camera.

deadwolfbones · 06-10-2009, 11:26 PM

hate to tell you, but you're not a typical newbie.

kthung · 06-11-2009, 09:21 AM

I admit I used to read CNET, but that was years ago before they did cameras. Mainly for cell phones and other gadgets.

bladerunner0427 · 06-11-2009, 09:21 PM

Originally posted by deadwolfbones

hate to tell you, but you're not a typical newbie.

I'm not?

It's nice to be different. That's why I own a Pentax

res3567 · 06-15-2009, 02:54 AM

Originally posted by ftpaddict

Who keeps reading CNET reviews? They're about as knowledgeable in cameras as I am in statistical analysis and data reconfiguration.

I second that! At least the part about CNET! You may be very good in statistical anaylysis and data reconfiguration and don't even know it!

ftpaddict · 06-15-2009, 03:55 AM

Originally posted by res3567

I second that! At least the part about CNET! You may be very good in statistical anaylysis and data reconfiguration and don't even know it!

Ignoring the fact that I took the job title from "Friends", one can easily tell that job has a lot to do with math. Therefore I know I'm not any good at it.

RMabo · 06-15-2009, 03:57 AM

Nice to see that it was the fastest in dim light, faster than the competition.

(can we know end this "Pentax is slow in dim light"?)

JCharles · 06-16-2009, 09:45 AM

I have found my K-m to be very easy to customize to my liking. The menus are logical and easy to operate. Once I changed a few settings I was most happy and no one should underestimate the value of shake reduction that works with all Pentax lenses. I think it's a great value.

glanglois · 06-16-2009, 12:45 PM

Originally posted by ftpaddict

I've not met a single person who reads CNET. Geek or no geek.

Not sure that it makes me a bad person, but there it is.

And no, I would not call myself a geek. I leave that to my Luddite daughter - who is smarter than I am but has a sense of proportion.

**Rondec** · 06-17-2009, 05:57 AM

The problem with C NET is that they are very specs oriented, while they often miss the big picture. Sites like that feed into the megapixel wars by focusing on small differences in numbers over the over all ease of usage.

06-10-2009, 01:57 PM	#1
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450	CNET reviews the K2000/K-m Pentax K2000 (body only) Digital camera reviews - CNET Reviews A bit late, but hey... it's a nice little bit of mostly positive press from one of the most-read tech sources. Quote: The good: Very fast autofocus; relatively nice viewfinder; wireless flash and in-body image stabilization. The bad: No Live View mode; poor default JPEG image settings. The bottom line: Speedy performance lifts the Pentax K2000 above the cheap-dSLR masses, but bad default settings make it an iffy choice for newbies.

06-16-2009, 12:45 PM	#14
glanglois Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Madison, Wis., USA Posts: 1,506	I read CNET Originally posted by ftpaddict I've not met a single person who reads CNET. Geek or no geek. Not sure that it makes me a bad person, but there it is. And no, I would not call myself a geek. I leave that to my Luddite daughter - who is smarter than I am but has a sense of proportion.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
CNet KX review	lurchlarson	Pentax News and Rumors	3	03-12-2010 01:01 PM
Shutterbug reviews K2000	jbinpg	Pentax News and Rumors	10	10-22-2009 05:22 PM
CNET UK review K-7	Adrian Owerko	Pentax News and Rumors	16	10-07-2009 06:48 AM
Megapixel reviews K2000	johngs	Pentax News and Rumors	11	02-08-2009 09:08 PM
CNET K20d review 8.0/10	jms698	Pentax News and Rumors	11	06-05-2008 08:29 PM

06-10-2009, 02:18 PM	#2
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,666	Who keeps reading CNET reviews? They're about as knowledgeable in cameras as I am in statistical analysis and data reconfiguration.

06-10-2009, 02:25 PM	#3
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450 Original Poster	Yeah, I know. And yet... edit: on the plus side, it's one of the few reviews I've read that concedes that the image quality is substantially better when you mess w/ the stock settings, so thumbs up on that.

06-10-2009, 02:37 PM	#4
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	Originally posted by ftpaddict Who keeps reading CNET reviews? They're about as knowledgeable in cameras as I am in statistical analysis and data reconfiguration. The same kind of people that would be interested in an entry level DSLR. Would you rather they read the poop review on DPR? Lots of ppl who are complete newbies (the K2000 target) read CNET reviews for all kinds of things. The fact that CNET may or may not be competent to produce such reviews is completely immaterial. NaCl( "but I was reading on CNET...." )H2O

06-10-2009, 03:10 PM	#5
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,666	Originally posted by NaClH2O The same kind of people that would be interested in an entry level DSLR. Would you rather they read the poop review on DPR? Lots of ppl who are complete newbies (the K2000 target) read CNET reviews for all kinds of things. The fact that CNET may or may not be competent to produce such reviews is completely immaterial. NaCl( "but I was reading on CNET...." )H2O I've not met a single person who reads CNET. Geek or no geek.

06-10-2009, 08:20 PM	#6
bladerunner0427 Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 113	"... bad default settings make it an iffy choice for newbies." WTF is that? I'm a newbie and I don't use the default settings. If one buys a dslr, it's not for "default" settings. One buys a dslr for the custom control of the camera.

06-10-2009, 11:26 PM	#7
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450 Original Poster	hate to tell you, but you're not a typical newbie.

06-11-2009, 09:21 AM	#8
kthung Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 359	I admit I used to read CNET, but that was years ago before they did cameras. Mainly for cell phones and other gadgets.

06-11-2009, 09:21 PM	#9
bladerunner0427 Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 113	Originally posted by deadwolfbones hate to tell you, but you're not a typical newbie. I'm not? It's nice to be different. That's why I own a Pentax

06-15-2009, 02:54 AM	#10
res3567 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Houston Tx. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,876	Originally posted by ftpaddict Who keeps reading CNET reviews? They're about as knowledgeable in cameras as I am in statistical analysis and data reconfiguration. I second that! At least the part about CNET! You may be very good in statistical anaylysis and data reconfiguration and don't even know it!

06-15-2009, 03:55 AM	#11
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,666	Originally posted by res3567 I second that! At least the part about CNET! You may be very good in statistical anaylysis and data reconfiguration and don't even know it! Ignoring the fact that I took the job title from "Friends", one can easily tell that job has a lot to do with math. Therefore I know I'm not any good at it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-15-2009, 03:57 AM	#12
RMabo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 845	Nice to see that it was the fastest in dim light, faster than the competition. (can we know end this "Pentax is slow in dim light"?)

06-16-2009, 09:45 AM	#13
JCharles Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Bridgeport, CT Posts: 26	I have found my K-m to be very easy to customize to my liking. The menus are logical and easy to operate. Once I changed a few settings I was most happy and no one should underestimate the value of shake reduction that works with all Pentax lenses. I think it's a great value.

06-17-2009, 05:57 AM	#15
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	The problem with C NET is that they are very specs oriented, while they often miss the big picture. Sites like that feed into the megapixel wars by focusing on small differences in numbers over the over all ease of usage.