[Mikhail]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Hi all Im very much a lurker on this forum [ too busy on other forums! ] but I am looking to buy a new dSLR but with a budget sadly. Ive got 3 options, Canon XTi, Nikon D40 and the Pentax K100/110D. If my budget was slightly bigger I would buy the K10D as it fits my needs perfectly. But I wouldnt be able to buy any decent glass to go with it [ the price difference between the above and the K10D covers glass ].
I just have a question about the K100D that reviewers cant answer.

1. Noise performance at high ISO. Ive seen various test images [ 100% crops ] but Im never gotting to look at my pictures at 100% so they re not overly helpful. I was wandering what peoples oppinions are of ISO800 and higher. Are the pictures usable for 8x10in prints? Im not expecting Canon MarkIII clean pictures but was wandering what size prints you could get out of the high ISO end. Also if people have real life examples those would be trully great!

2. Buffer depth. I will be shooting in RAW 90% of the time and was wandering if the really shallow buffer depth of 3 RAW images is a problem. Even when I do occasionally shoot some sports for people Im not one to really use continous shooting but it is rather shallow and am curious in every day operation does it get in the way?

I hope you guys can answer some of these questions as it would be most certainly appreciated!

Thanks

[mattdm]

1. ISO 800 and even 1600 performance is very good. I wouldn't blink about printing them at 8x10.

2. It's a little bit annoying. Make the times when you need more buffer be some of the 10% when you're shooting jpeg.

[SpecialK]

I think 800 is OK. I can't recall shooting higher, though.

Here is a sample at 800. (Soory fo rthe link but I don't have any image-posting room left):

http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q78/KylePix/061230-2287NixonReading.jpg

The tiny buffer does not affect me as I rarely use the burst mode.

[bc_the_path]

I have no idea about the Canon model but I have made quite a comparison between D40 and K100D. Now I believe they are not comparable!! (That's probably why Nikon upgraded their camera within months by putting mor MPs).
Without being too technical, I can say that;
- K100D "feels like a camera", D40 is too plasticky;
- I love the LCD screen above the camera, D40 lacks it;
- "Shake reduction" is present and it does work in K100D;
- Noise (at the same ISO) is lower in K100D.
- You will have a wider list of old lenses to choose from (all with SR!).

Hope you reach the right decision

[Deni]

High iso performance is quite good with the k100d. I often end up using iso 1600 when I don't want to use the flash and I'm happy with the quality it gives me.

As for the buffer, I don't shoot burst, but it takes some time while the camera writes raw files to the card and that's annoying. If I take a photo in jpg then the review is instant, in raw it takes some seconds.

The XTi is a very nice camera, but if I had to go canon I'd get the XT as I don't need 10mp and the XT produces better high iso shots.

Though for the price the k100d is unbeatable! I had the money for the k10d, but just, so it would have left me only with the kit lens. So I bought the k100d (a used one) and spend the rest on camera stuff. I advise you to do the same. Sort of split your budget in two. Half for the body and the other half for lenses and accessories.

[vinzer]

As others have mentioned, the K110/100D does well using high ISOs. Add to that in-body SR, and you're practically covered for most types of photography.

Of course, if you're looking to shoot a lot of sports, that buffer might be too limiting for you. Then again, I've seen people using the K110/100D for sports photography, and they've gotten some remarkable shots.

It's up to you, really. I was also in the same quandary as you. I ended up with Pentax, just because of SR (consider the cost of IS and VR lenses versus non-stabilized ones), image quality, and the availability of cheap old glass (which works well on Pentax DSLRs, I might add). I'd suggest you look over at KEH, eBay, or some other used lens store and see if the choices are to your liking. One of Pentax's greatest strengths is glass, from the Limiteds, to the *'s to even the humble 50's.

As well, I love the brightness in the viewfinder of Pentax. The 400D's was small compared to the K110/100D's.

Try them out for yourself at a store. You wouldn't really appreciate the differences until you try the cameras out yourself. Good luck!

[ivoire]

K10D prices have dropped. If it meets your needs, suggest another look at your budget. It will be a better deal in the long run.

[Mikhail]

Thanks to all for the replies!
Thanks SpecialK for that picture if thats the ISO performance at ISO800 I will be more than happy with the K100D then!
The price to feature ratio of the K100D I personally think is unbeatable [ $499CAD new ]. I plan on going to my local store to test it hands on but it looks like I will be leaving Canon for Pentax! Also compared to the D40 Ive seen some high ISO shots and the Nikon smudges details too much for my liking and the amount of lenses available for the Pentax is perfect as Ive got family that still shoots with the K1000 I think and they have some nice penatx glass lying around!
The K10D prices have dropped but Ive found that bodies come and go but if you invest in good glass they last for a life time. So the price of the K100D lets me get into Digital at a price that is very good and meaning I can invest in some nicer glass which will still be perfectly usable when I feel Im reading to upgrade to a higher performance body.

Thanks to All looking forward to getting my pentax!

[regken]

Hi,
You make reference to the fact that your budget is big enough for some decent glass. If you are comfortable with shooting in a semi manual mode you might want to take a look at rethinking the K10D. At $720 after rebate the K10D body coupled with 3 A/F/M type lenses, either zoom or primes, would be near the $1,000 mark. That would be less than either the Canon or Nikon with one extra lens of average quality.
This is the approach a lot of us seem to have taken. IMO you can find older glass that is as good as Canon "L" lenses and they are all stabilized, not a small item.

If you go with the K100D at $340 for the body only the amount of older glass you could get would cover all ranges and be image stabilized.

Regards,
Ken

[Mikhail]

Good point made Ken and I will deffinietly look into. Right now I want to get a feel for the cameras in person as thats important to me as well. Im most likely not getting a Nikon its just that the Canon is still tempting... But at the moment Im thinking of the K100D Body, Sigma 17-70mm Macro and a zoom to start off... I love landscapes and macro work so the sigma fits perfectly and Im thinking of getting the DA 50-200 or sigma 70-300 Macro [ do pentax make one in this range? ] which are similary priced and able to cover the long range on the occassions I need it. And I will be adding some old primes to this collection as well which covers my indoor shooting needs [ family ].

Thanks
Mikhail

[arbutusq]

My advice is spend as little as you can on the camera body (K100d) and put the difference in glass. That's where you'll see the most difference in image quality.

[Alfisti]

In all honesty .....

- AF is a tad slower than the competition but has really surprised me as it has not annoyed me in the slightest (i am easily annoyed)

- High ISO is utterly fantastic

- Compared to a D40 the camera is SLOOOOOOWWWW. Slow read, slow write, ridiculously slow playback, slow menu, slow everything. I use Sandisk Ultra II cards and still .... sloooooooowwwww.

- The buffer is massively annoying using RAW, even just displaying one image takes about three seconds.

[Mikhail]

In all honesty .....
- Compared to a D40 the camera is SLOOOOOOWWWW. Slow read, slow write, ridiculously slow playback, slow menu, slow everything. I use Sandisk Ultra II cards and still .... sloooooooowwwww.

- The buffer is massively annoying using RAW, even just displaying one image takes about three seconds.

See those things are what bother me... making me wander maybe I should get the K10D with kitlens/50-200 instead of the Sigma which costs nearly as much as K100D. Though I think I can put up with it as the camera im using at the moment it takes nearly a whole second before I can take anouther picture [ RAW ] no matter what drive mode so the K100D beats it by far...

Thanks
Mikhail

[Arpe]

The shake reduction is the big thing for me. Don't have to pay an extra 50% for Canon or Nikon anti-shake lenses, every lens you buy will have it automatically, even 50 year old lenses.

[hinman]

To others, I apologize in going off topic. I saw Deni has Tyhristor twin Flash on his forum signature, I wonder if Deni or others who knows Tyhirtor twin flash can share their experience with the flash on K100D. I saw it on ebay in
Thyristor Twin Flash for Pentax K10D K110D K100D *ist - (item 170135099349 end time Aug-03-07 21:30:15 PDT)

and I wonder how good a flash Thyristor does for you. If I intend to get a flash on a low budget for usage as a bounce flash for indoor portraits, do you find it to be good choice and since K100D only support PTTL, can you share with us what is missing in the Thyristor flash. I assume that it is NOT PTTL Apology again on the naive question as I don't clearly understand PTTL/TTL and even on the term for dedicated flash. All I need is a flash that with experience on usage, I can count on for indoor portraits assisting the slow lens like the kit lens or the da 50-200.

Thanks,

Hin