Why I Got a k20 Instead

JCharles · 01-27-2011, 12:09 PM

I recently decided to move up from my k-m (k-2000) to get better resolution and control. My research lead me to conclude that the lens is where I should concentrate my meager finances. By buying an older k20d rather than the k-7, I used the savings to help buy a Tamron SP AF 90mm f2.8 marco. Thus, I got a fine camera and a great prime that does excellent macro. The questions going forward are: 1. when do I need to but the new stuff? 2. Should I just stick with my k20d (that I love)? 3. Do I need to learn to do video with my dslr?

**blackcloudbrew** · 01-27-2011, 01:00 PM

Congrads, my k20 is my friend too (except in very low light). In answering your questions.

1. When you have money and you've found that your current kit isn't enough.
2. I would until you find that it isn't enough for your photography.
3. Do you? I'm no fan of video and having it on a camera is not a decision maker/breaker for me. If I had it, I'd play with it but I'm not (and never really have been) a video person. So the question is really back to you, do you?

**twilhelm** · 01-27-2011, 02:56 PM

I'm right with you JCharles.

I've been shooting with my K10d for 3 years now. At this point I'm wanting to upgrade, but for 1 I like the K10d so much moving to the K20d makes sense. I'm also considering the fact that the difference in price from a used K20d to a new K5 (or K7) would do nicely to check off some of the lenses I have on my "must have" list. And frankly video on a dslr does nothing for me.

As far as when to upgrade? That's as much personal as necessity oriented. I still see some stellar images coming from *ist D series cameras. I have one also and use it quite frequently, even on shooting jobs for my assistant or a backup camera.

Tony

**Fontan** · 01-27-2011, 03:36 PM

I personally like K10D better. To me K20D's sensor seems excessively vivid.

**twilhelm** · 01-27-2011, 04:10 PM

@fontan,
Would you say it's excessively vivid shooting Jpg, Raw or both? I haven't had a chance to use one (there is no dealer near me).
It seems a lot of the newer cameras have become excessively vivid and over-saturated.

**Fontan** · 01-27-2011, 04:21 PM

Originally posted by twilhelm

@fontan,
Would you say it's excessively vivid shooting Jpg, Raw or both? I haven't had a chance to use one (there is no dealer near me).
It seems a lot of the newer cameras have become excessively vivid and over-saturated.

Jpeg vs. RAW - that is a very good point. To be honest with you, I am not sure because i don't own one. But my guess would be that this is more of a problem with Jpeg. K20D's output just look "plasticky" vs. K10D more appropriately grained, or something like that. A matter of preference, I am sure, and this is just simple observation I make based on my computer monitor which is not calibrated.

I also see the same trend from K-7 to K-5. I like K-7's sensor much better.

clockwork247 · 01-27-2011, 09:17 PM

Originally posted by JCharles

I recently decided to move up from my k-m (k-2000) to get better resolution and control. My research lead me to conclude that the lens is where I should concentrate my meager finances. By buying an older k20d rather than the k-7, I used the savings to help buy a Tamron SP AF 90mm f2.8 marco. Thus, I got a fine camera and a great prime that does excellent macro. The questions going forward are: 1. when do I need to but the new stuff? 2. Should I just stick with my k20d (that I love)? 3. Do I need to learn to do video with my dslr?

Um, i really don't know, for me to use a crappy body VS top of the line, the saving must be quite big (aka costing double the body I have).

I don't see the point of moving from a k-m to a k20d, there's not that much improvement, you might as well spend the whole lot on lens.

Moving to a better body improves all your lens, the k-5 is about 2 stops in ISO better than the older ccd sensor if not more. if you're already sitting with medium range lens (f/4 ish zoom), this could break the barrier for you...

My #1 priority is to get lens, then body, lens always stays the same, body changes 10 times every year... by this time next year I can grab the newest body of this year for the price of lunch.

SpecialK · 01-27-2011, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Do I need to learn to do video with my dslr?

If you do, it won't be with the K20D.

RioRico · 01-28-2011, 12:38 AM

I got my K20D just 2.6 years ago specifically because I *didn't* want to feel compelled to 'upgrade' anytime soon. It's got megapickles and features and toughness to last quite awhile. Does it meet all my needs and desires? Nope. That's why I still carry film cams and P&S's. Now I'm trying to work up a budget balance for other cameras -- not upgrades, just others. Maybe an m4/3 so I can start using cheap fast cine lenses. Maybe a FF dSLR so I can exploit what FF does best: ultrawide angles and ultrathin DOF (not at the same time). Of course, I can burn a lot of film for the cost of a FF dSLR...

Congrats on getting a K20D. You have chosen wisely, grasshopper.

jamesm007 · 01-28-2011, 06:02 AM

Originally posted by JCharles

I recently decided to move up from my k-m (k-2000) to get better resolution and control. My research lead me to conclude that the lens is where I should concentrate my meager finances. By buying an older k20d rather than the k-7, I used the savings to help buy a Tamron SP AF 90mm f2.8 marco. Thus, I got a fine camera and a great prime that does excellent macro. The questions going forward are: 1. when do I need to but the new stuff? 2. Should I just stick with my k20d (that I love)? 3. Do I need to learn to do video with my dslr?

Congratulations !

Does your K20D feels a bit more solid compared to the K-m? How is the ergonomics? I bet you have a WR lens on your LBA list now

I do a lot of shooting outdoors and in any weather. I live in MI USA and have 4 seasons. Each of these seasons brings unique photo opportunities. Now a hard down pour does not appeal to me, but shooting in the snow or light rain or going hiking through the woods is. A tough all weather camera is just about a must for me, not just nice to have.

normhead · 01-28-2011, 06:39 AM

I've never shot in jpg, and I've never had an issue with the colour of the k20D. I'm assuming , since you said things look like plastic, (not really a photo term) that you've gone into the menus and turned down the contrast and saturation and stuff like that. I've never done it but I think you can. I seem to remember stuff like that, looking through the menus while looking for other things.

wll · 01-29-2011, 07:42 AM

When the K-7 came out I was tempted to get it, but I did not like what the reports said about it at higher ISO's ..... so .... I stuck with the K20D.

When the K5 came out I wanted it, it is (IMHO) the camera the K7 should have been. I bought all the accessories for the K5 and waiting for the price to come down before I buy, but ....... I bought two more K20D's with less than 2500 clicks each and in like new condition in the meantime.

For me the K20D is an incredible camera, I know it can't do video and at high ISO capability is not up to par with today's cameras, but still good non the less (especially with the new noise software that is available now).

I now have K20D's and a K-x, sold off my K10's (high ISO was crap, IMHO) K200D, DS's.

Yep, you did well getting the K20D, it is on my A list :-)

wll

vjacesslav · 01-29-2011, 08:05 AM

Congratulations !

Ron Kruger · 01-29-2011, 08:33 AM

I'm very frugile by necessisity, because a large part of my income is from photography, and I consider a camera a tool.
I've changed cameras/upgraded only three times in four decades, and it took me a long time to figure out the relative importantance of glass. In general, my advice is to spend more for a lens than for a body.
My switch from film to digital was with a K20D shortly after it came out, and I have been more pleased with my decision with each Limited I've purchased. It is an amazing camera, and I have adjusted it to achieve the look I want, reminiscent of Kodachrome. (Nothing plastic about that.)
I now find myself in need of another camera and am vascilating between upgrading to a K5 (primarily for the expanded DR and higher ISO capabilities) and keeping the K20D as backup, simply getting another K20D, or getting a K10D, because the richness that old CCD sensor produces still appeals to me, and I have discovered that the mega megapixel race is mostly overkill from a practical sense.
There are many considerations, but for me, cost is a major factor. Value for the money is the major reason I switched to Pentax in the first place. No camera from any manufacturer is perfect, and the more one knows about photography the easier it is to work around limitations and accentuate strong points. Photographic abilitity is the equalizer.
The bottom line is...well, the bottom line. Is the advantages of a K5 worth almost $1,000 more than a K10D, now selling used for around $250?
I'm still not sure. But one thing is sure: the K20D will be with me and heavily used for years to come. It is a keeper.

**twilhelm** · 01-29-2011, 09:12 AM

Ron,
I am really with you on the upgrade aspect. I love my K10d, and buying a K20d would really be to replace my *ist DL as a backup camera. Though I have no qualms about it either. In all truth another K10d would suit my needs fine.
In the photography jobs I have, I rarely come across a need for the higher iso sensitivity that can be achieved with a K5. And frankly I have some extremely large prints made from my K10d that are perfect. For the size sensor we are using, going beyond the 10 megapixel seems to me to be more of a selling point than a using point. Just my opinion.
I also agree that the lenses you use can really bring out what the sensor is capable of. Not that much different when we are using film.

01-29-2011, 07:42 AM	#12
wll Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Mission Hills, CA Posts: 773	K20d ;-) When the K-7 came out I was tempted to get it, but I did not like what the reports said about it at higher ISO's ..... so .... I stuck with the K20D. When the K5 came out I wanted it, it is (IMHO) the camera the K7 should have been. I bought all the accessories for the K5 and waiting for the price to come down before I buy, but ....... I bought two more K20D's with less than 2500 clicks each and in like new condition in the meantime. For me the K20D is an incredible camera, I know it can't do video and at high ISO capability is not up to par with today's cameras, but still good non the less (especially with the new noise software that is available now). I now have K20D's and a K-x, sold off my K10's (high ISO was crap, IMHO) K200D, DS's. Yep, you did well getting the K20D, it is on my A list :-) wll

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
I would like a K-5 but my K20 is still OK.	Richard Spencer	Pentax DSLR Discussion	24	11-28-2010 08:15 AM
k20 d	gmcclean	Welcomes and Introductions	3	10-17-2010 10:51 AM
Machinery K20 on K20 love (car related)	ga-hing	Post Your Photos!	8	09-03-2010 04:58 PM
K20 or K-x	caseygtc	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	10-06-2009 12:28 PM
New K20 what to get with it	Gary-in-oz	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	11-11-2008 01:54 PM

01-27-2011, 12:09 PM	#1
JCharles Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Bridgeport, CT Posts: 26	Why I Got a k20 Instead I recently decided to move up from my k-m (k-2000) to get better resolution and control. My research lead me to conclude that the lens is where I should concentrate my meager finances. By buying an older k20d rather than the k-7, I used the savings to help buy a Tamron SP AF 90mm f2.8 marco. Thus, I got a fine camera and a great prime that does excellent macro. The questions going forward are: 1. when do I need to but the new stuff? 2. Should I just stick with my k20d (that I love)? 3. Do I need to learn to do video with my dslr?

01-27-2011, 01:00 PM	#2
blackcloudbrew Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Cotati, California USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,460	Congrads, my k20 is my friend too (except in very low light). In answering your questions. 1. When you have money and you've found that your current kit isn't enough. 2. I would until you find that it isn't enough for your photography. 3. Do you? I'm no fan of video and having it on a camera is not a decision maker/breaker for me. If I had it, I'd play with it but I'm not (and never really have been) a video person. So the question is really back to you, do you?

01-27-2011, 02:56 PM	#3
twilhelm Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,369	I'm right with you JCharles. I've been shooting with my K10d for 3 years now. At this point I'm wanting to upgrade, but for 1 I like the K10d so much moving to the K20d makes sense. I'm also considering the fact that the difference in price from a used K20d to a new K5 (or K7) would do nicely to check off some of the lenses I have on my "must have" list. And frankly video on a dslr does nothing for me. As far as when to upgrade? That's as much personal as necessity oriented. I still see some stellar images coming from *ist D series cameras. I have one also and use it quite frequently, even on shooting jobs for my assistant or a backup camera. Tony

01-27-2011, 03:36 PM	#4
Fontan Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: 5th floor Posts: 1,610	I personally like K10D better. To me K20D's sensor seems excessively vivid.

01-27-2011, 04:10 PM	#5
twilhelm Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,369	@fontan, Would you say it's excessively vivid shooting Jpg, Raw or both? I haven't had a chance to use one (there is no dealer near me). It seems a lot of the newer cameras have become excessively vivid and over-saturated.

01-27-2011, 04:21 PM	#6
Fontan Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: 5th floor Posts: 1,610	Originally posted by twilhelm @fontan, Would you say it's excessively vivid shooting Jpg, Raw or both? I haven't had a chance to use one (there is no dealer near me). It seems a lot of the newer cameras have become excessively vivid and over-saturated. Jpeg vs. RAW - that is a very good point. To be honest with you, I am not sure because i don't own one. But my guess would be that this is more of a problem with Jpeg. K20D's output just look "plasticky" vs. K10D more appropriately grained, or something like that. A matter of preference, I am sure, and this is just simple observation I make based on my computer monitor which is not calibrated. I also see the same trend from K-7 to K-5. I like K-7's sensor much better.

01-27-2011, 09:17 PM	#7
clockwork247 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 360	Originally posted by JCharles I recently decided to move up from my k-m (k-2000) to get better resolution and control. My research lead me to conclude that the lens is where I should concentrate my meager finances. By buying an older k20d rather than the k-7, I used the savings to help buy a Tamron SP AF 90mm f2.8 marco. Thus, I got a fine camera and a great prime that does excellent macro. The questions going forward are: 1. when do I need to but the new stuff? 2. Should I just stick with my k20d (that I love)? 3. Do I need to learn to do video with my dslr? Um, i really don't know, for me to use a crappy body VS top of the line, the saving must be quite big (aka costing double the body I have). I don't see the point of moving from a k-m to a k20d, there's not that much improvement, you might as well spend the whole lot on lens. Moving to a better body improves all your lens, the k-5 is about 2 stops in ISO better than the older ccd sensor if not more. if you're already sitting with medium range lens (f/4 ish zoom), this could break the barrier for you... My #1 priority is to get lens, then body, lens always stays the same, body changes 10 times every year... by this time next year I can grab the newest body of this year for the price of lunch.

01-27-2011, 11:24 PM	#8
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	Quote: Do I need to learn to do video with my dslr? If you do, it won't be with the K20D.

01-28-2011, 12:38 AM	#9
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	I got my K20D just 2.6 years ago specifically because I didn't want to feel compelled to 'upgrade' anytime soon. It's got megapickles and features and toughness to last quite awhile. Does it meet all my needs and desires? Nope. That's why I still carry film cams and P&S's. Now I'm trying to work up a budget balance for other cameras -- not upgrades, just others. Maybe an m4/3 so I can start using cheap fast cine lenses. Maybe a FF dSLR so I can exploit what FF does best: ultrawide angles and ultrathin DOF (not at the same time). Of course, I can burn a lot of film for the cost of a FF dSLR... Congrats on getting a K20D. You have chosen wisely, grasshopper.

01-28-2011, 06:02 AM	#10
jamesm007 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Detroit MI, USA Posts: 508	Originally posted by JCharles I recently decided to move up from my k-m (k-2000) to get better resolution and control. My research lead me to conclude that the lens is where I should concentrate my meager finances. By buying an older k20d rather than the k-7, I used the savings to help buy a Tamron SP AF 90mm f2.8 marco. Thus, I got a fine camera and a great prime that does excellent macro. The questions going forward are: 1. when do I need to but the new stuff? 2. Should I just stick with my k20d (that I love)? 3. Do I need to learn to do video with my dslr? Congratulations ! Does your K20D feels a bit more solid compared to the K-m? How is the ergonomics? I bet you have a WR lens on your LBA list now I do a lot of shooting outdoors and in any weather. I live in MI USA and have 4 seasons. Each of these seasons brings unique photo opportunities. Now a hard down pour does not appeal to me, but shooting in the snow or light rain or going hiking through the woods is. A tough all weather camera is just about a must for me, not just nice to have.

01-29-2011, 08:05 AM	#13
vjacesslav Marketplace Reseller Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Košice, Czechoslovakia, Europe Union Photos: Gallery Posts: 366	Congratulations !

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-28-2011, 06:39 AM	#11
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	I've never shot in jpg, and I've never had an issue with the colour of the k20D. I'm assuming , since you said things look like plastic, (not really a photo term) that you've gone into the menus and turned down the contrast and saturation and stuff like that. I've never done it but I think you can. I seem to remember stuff like that, looking through the menus while looking for other things.

01-29-2011, 08:33 AM	#14
Ron Kruger Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Missouri Posts: 534	I'm very frugile by necessisity, because a large part of my income is from photography, and I consider a camera a tool. I've changed cameras/upgraded only three times in four decades, and it took me a long time to figure out the relative importantance of glass. In general, my advice is to spend more for a lens than for a body. My switch from film to digital was with a K20D shortly after it came out, and I have been more pleased with my decision with each Limited I've purchased. It is an amazing camera, and I have adjusted it to achieve the look I want, reminiscent of Kodachrome. (Nothing plastic about that.) I now find myself in need of another camera and am vascilating between upgrading to a K5 (primarily for the expanded DR and higher ISO capabilities) and keeping the K20D as backup, simply getting another K20D, or getting a K10D, because the richness that old CCD sensor produces still appeals to me, and I have discovered that the mega megapixel race is mostly overkill from a practical sense. There are many considerations, but for me, cost is a major factor. Value for the money is the major reason I switched to Pentax in the first place. No camera from any manufacturer is perfect, and the more one knows about photography the easier it is to work around limitations and accentuate strong points. Photographic abilitity is the equalizer. The bottom line is...well, the bottom line. Is the advantages of a K5 worth almost $1,000 more than a K10D, now selling used for around $250? I'm still not sure. But one thing is sure: the K20D will be with me and heavily used for years to come. It is a keeper.

01-29-2011, 09:12 AM	#15
twilhelm Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,369	Ron, I am really with you on the upgrade aspect. I love my K10d, and buying a K20d would really be to replace my *ist DL as a backup camera. Though I have no qualms about it either. In all truth another K10d would suit my needs fine. In the photography jobs I have, I rarely come across a need for the higher iso sensitivity that can be achieved with a K5. And frankly I have some extremely large prints made from my K10d that are perfect. For the size sensor we are using, going beyond the 10 megapixel seems to me to be more of a selling point than a using point. Just my opinion. I also agree that the lenses you use can really bring out what the sensor is capable of. Not that much different when we are using film.