New Member and looking at DSLRs

sigma projects · 03-04-2007, 06:39 PM

Not sure if I posted this in the right section earlier since i can't find it, lol. But yea thought maybe best to post it here. Thanks =D

I've owned an old K1000 for quite some time and searched on these forums that I can use my old lenses on the digital Ks, which makes me happy. Main reason I'm looking into getting a DSLR is because my little Nikon was stolen and for my major I really need a digital camera but thought I should take it to the next step. Can anyone here point me in the direction of what would best suit my needs? I'm basically looking for something that can do all that my K1000 could. Would a K110D be comparable or are the K100D more on the mark. Are either one better at taking night shots over the other? Thanks guys!

FotoPete · 03-04-2007, 06:50 PM

The K100D and the K110D are exactly the same. The K100D costs a little more because of the implementation of a sensor shifting type image stabilizer. Both are identitical in every other respect.

Etiher would be a good choice.

sigma projects · 03-04-2007, 07:03 PM

Oh ok, is the sensor shifting type image stabilizer really that useful? Or is this one of those newb questions where the reply is "do a search"

Thanks for the help!

bdavis · 03-04-2007, 07:20 PM

DO A SEARCH!

Just kidding. (although, if you do search, you'll find a few more opinions)

IMO, a large number of night scenes are captured with the camera on a tripod--and you won't be using the SR on a tripod. If all you were ever going to shoot were night scenes on a tripod, you might not need the SR. However, I'm finding the SR on my camera useful, and usually most people have an itch to shoot more than tripod-connected shots. I've handheld things that I shouldn't have (or couldn't have in the past), I've shot at 800 ISO instead of 1600, etc. The shake reduction, in this case, is my fudge factor (mmm..fudge).

I won't say that it's been an earth-shatteringly-awesome feature for me, but its worth a good price-check search. I think you find, at this point, that there isn't a $100 difference as MSRP indicates between the two models, at many retailers.

sigma projects · 03-04-2007, 08:40 PM

yea, I know I should use a tripod for night shots (I do have one), but I'm usually in the situation where setting up one is not optimal, so you're saying that it does help with night shots too? I mean I don't do a lot of night shots, but that's my main weak point since I usually don't setup a tripod... but I'd love to capture some really nice night shots.

would it be best for me to post in the "post your photo" thread of my night shots to get pointers on correcting my newbness? Thanks again guys, I love forums

slip · 03-04-2007, 08:54 PM

go for the K100 with shake reduction. you will not regret your choice

cheers and good luck

randy

FotoPete · 03-04-2007, 09:44 PM

Well Shake Reduction won't help for really long exposures. If you are doing alot of tripoded work, the SR isn't needed.

Well its up to you really if you want to spend the extra $$ to go get the K100d. If you do alot of indoor w/o flash or telephoto stuff, yea it could help you.

foxglove · 03-05-2007, 06:54 AM

Another vote for SR - you should probably get an extra two stops beyond what you can currently hand hold. So not a replacement for a tripod (you're not going to do x second exposures even with SR) but handy for getting the shots that are on the edge of doable. One note of caution, though - if you're using older lenses that don't transmit FL info to the camera, and you don't absolutely need SR, turn it off. I got a bunch of inexplicably lousy shots that I think were the result of leaving SR on and forgetting to change the FL when changing lenses. Or maybe I just screwed up some other way!

Regardless, if you can afford the extra bucks, it's a nice feature to have.

Welcome to the forums, hope to see some shots from you soon!

Julie

**jfdavis58** · 03-05-2007, 07:55 AM

Like many other slr features, shake reduction will put you in a YMMV situation.

If you are the type of shooter who has a solid grasp of fundamentals, things like leaning on or pushing against some external support while shooting which is pertinent in this discussion, then SR will be a great benefit. If you just snap off shots, without tightening muscles and tucking your elbows in firmly and timing the shot with your breathing, then it's a bust.

It doesn't make out of focus shots, in focus. It's cannot correct a bad exposure. It's not a substitute for a poor quality lens. You cannot see it work like lens based stabilization--you must look to the PC monitor or a print.

Unless you do a lot of tripod work it's mostly set and forget--it will splash a screen to select focal length with less capable/older lenses. When used properly it does seem a little like magic.

Alvin · 03-05-2007, 12:20 PM

Welcome to the forums! You'll likely see a flood of opinions coming your way. Personally, I'd go with the SR, but if you're tight on cash or you find yourself doing a majority of tripoded work, the K110D will do a great job too.

sigma projects · 03-07-2007, 12:36 PM

Thanks for the help guys. I think SR seems mighty worth it, I guess time to hunt for a K100D

I'll post up some pics of mine in photo thread.

Thanks again guys for all the info.

03-04-2007, 06:39 PM	#1
sigma projects New Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: So Cal Posts: 10	New Member and looking at DSLRs Not sure if I posted this in the right section earlier since i can't find it, lol. But yea thought maybe best to post it here. Thanks =D I've owned an old K1000 for quite some time and searched on these forums that I can use my old lenses on the digital Ks, which makes me happy. Main reason I'm looking into getting a DSLR is because my little Nikon was stolen and for my major I really need a digital camera but thought I should take it to the next step. Can anyone here point me in the direction of what would best suit my needs? I'm basically looking for something that can do all that my K1000 could. Would a K110D be comparable or are the K100D more on the mark. Are either one better at taking night shots over the other? Thanks guys!

03-05-2007, 07:55 AM	#9
jfdavis58 Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316 Photos: Gallery Posts: 887	On SR... Like many other slr features, shake reduction will put you in a YMMV situation. If you are the type of shooter who has a solid grasp of fundamentals, things like leaning on or pushing against some external support while shooting which is pertinent in this discussion, then SR will be a great benefit. If you just snap off shots, without tightening muscles and tucking your elbows in firmly and timing the shot with your breathing, then it's a bust. It doesn't make out of focus shots, in focus. It's cannot correct a bad exposure. It's not a substitute for a poor quality lens. You cannot see it work like lens based stabilization--you must look to the PC monitor or a print. Unless you do a lot of tripod work it's mostly set and forget--it will splash a screen to select focal length with less capable/older lenses. When used properly it does seem a little like magic.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
New member, senior member, pentaxian, site supporter etc....	DaveHolmes	General Talk	7	05-02-2011 02:34 AM
New to DSLRs	drew39k	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	27	05-27-2010 05:47 PM
New to dSLRs and the Forum..	TheoJones	Welcomes and Introductions	3	11-20-2009 01:53 PM
Old flash on DSLRs	logic14	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	11	11-11-2009 12:57 PM
Pentax DSLRS RAW + JPEG, and all DSLRs for that matter.	ebooks4pentax	Pentax DSLR Discussion	5	10-01-2008 01:59 PM

03-04-2007, 06:50 PM	#2
FotoPete Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,774	The K100D and the K110D are exactly the same. The K100D costs a little more because of the implementation of a sensor shifting type image stabilizer. Both are identitical in every other respect. Etiher would be a good choice.

03-04-2007, 07:03 PM	#3
sigma projects New Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: So Cal Posts: 10 Original Poster	Oh ok, is the sensor shifting type image stabilizer really that useful? Or is this one of those newb questions where the reply is "do a search" Thanks for the help!

03-04-2007, 07:20 PM	#4
bdavis Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 'Burque, NM Posts: 309	DO A SEARCH! Just kidding. (although, if you do search, you'll find a few more opinions) IMO, a large number of night scenes are captured with the camera on a tripod--and you won't be using the SR on a tripod. If all you were ever going to shoot were night scenes on a tripod, you might not need the SR. However, I'm finding the SR on my camera useful, and usually most people have an itch to shoot more than tripod-connected shots. I've handheld things that I shouldn't have (or couldn't have in the past), I've shot at 800 ISO instead of 1600, etc. The shake reduction, in this case, is my fudge factor (mmm..fudge). I won't say that it's been an earth-shatteringly-awesome feature for me, but its worth a good price-check search. I think you find, at this point, that there isn't a $100 difference as MSRP indicates between the two models, at many retailers.

03-04-2007, 08:40 PM	#5
sigma projects New Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: So Cal Posts: 10 Original Poster	yea, I know I should use a tripod for night shots (I do have one), but I'm usually in the situation where setting up one is not optimal, so you're saying that it does help with night shots too? I mean I don't do a lot of night shots, but that's my main weak point since I usually don't setup a tripod... but I'd love to capture some really nice night shots. would it be best for me to post in the "post your photo" thread of my night shots to get pointers on correcting my newbness? Thanks again guys, I love forums

03-04-2007, 08:54 PM	#6
slip Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,535	go for the K100 with shake reduction. you will not regret your choice cheers and good luck randy

03-04-2007, 09:44 PM	#7
FotoPete Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,774	Well Shake Reduction won't help for really long exposures. If you are doing alot of tripoded work, the SR isn't needed. Well its up to you really if you want to spend the extra $$ to go get the K100d. If you do alot of indoor w/o flash or telephoto stuff, yea it could help you.

03-05-2007, 06:54 AM	#8
foxglove Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Atlantic Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,049	Another vote for SR - you should probably get an extra two stops beyond what you can currently hand hold. So not a replacement for a tripod (you're not going to do x second exposures even with SR) but handy for getting the shots that are on the edge of doable. One note of caution, though - if you're using older lenses that don't transmit FL info to the camera, and you don't absolutely need SR, turn it off. I got a bunch of inexplicably lousy shots that I think were the result of leaving SR on and forgetting to change the FL when changing lenses. Or maybe I just screwed up some other way! Regardless, if you can afford the extra bucks, it's a nice feature to have. Welcome to the forums, hope to see some shots from you soon! Julie

03-05-2007, 12:20 PM	#10
Alvin Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Mississauga, Ontario, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,517	Welcome to the forums! You'll likely see a flood of opinions coming your way. Personally, I'd go with the SR, but if you're tight on cash or you find yourself doing a majority of tripoded work, the K110D will do a great job too.

03-07-2007, 12:36 PM	#11
sigma projects New Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: So Cal Posts: 10 Original Poster	Thanks for the help guys. I think SR seems mighty worth it, I guess time to hunt for a K100D I'll post up some pics of mine in photo thread. Thanks again guys for all the info.