10d or 100d super?

jmdeegan · 11-05-2007, 03:27 PM

OK, I think this is the last question I am trying to understand before I decide....

it's looking more like the 10d at this point (missed out on all the low-priced used 100d's)

But some have mentioned the 100d is better in low-light scenarios. How much better? For example, last night I was taking pictures in my living room, just messing around with the wife's canon S2 on continuous mode, and after the first shot, there was no flash. so the rest of the pictures are pretty much useless, even though the room itself was decently lit.

Just trying to understand this comment which was made earlier in the thread-is it a substantial difference, or one where I just need to adjust a little differently with one camera versus the other?

Other than that, I am getting to the point where it's like analysis paralysis. I think either one will be nice to have, I just want to decide and start learning....

WMBP · 11-05-2007, 04:09 PM

Originally posted by jmdeegan

But some have mentioned the 100d is better in low-light scenarios. How much better? For example, last night I was taking pictures in my living room, just messing around with the wife's canon S2 on continuous mode, and after the first shot, there was no flash. so the rest of the pictures are pretty much useless, even though the room itself was decently lit.

Just trying to understand this comment which was made earlier in the thread-is it a substantial difference, or one where I just need to adjust a little differently with one camera versus the other?

Either the K100D or the K10D is going to be significantly better in low-light than the Canon PowerShot S2 (or S3, or S5). So forget about that.

Now, is the K10D significantly worse than the K100D? Depends on who you ask. Ask a K100D owner, and the answer may be yes. Ask a K10D owner and the answer is either no (that's my answer) or not significant enough to offset the other advantages of the K10D (my other answer).

I just shot two photos here in my living room. Both were taken at ISO 1600, f/4 @ 1/50th sec. One was shot with the K10D, the other was taken with the Pentax *ist DS. Click here to see the two shots. I uploaded them to a Picasa Web Albums gallery so I could leave 'em large for comparison. Marked 'em A and B. I think the 6 MP *ist DS's noise should be pretty similar to what you'd see with a K100D.

You tell me, which is better or worse? Which was taken with which camera?

NOTE that I didn't use the same lens on both cameras. One camera had the Pentax 16-45 f/4, the other hand the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 macro. The photos were given NO post-processing at all. I opened them in Picasa, which can read PEF files but not interpret the EXIF data in them. Because both were shot raw, but both are now the same size, one of the files has been sized down more than the other. But otherwise these are pretty much straight from the cameras.

It's not a fair test for many reasons. Perhaps I should have used the same lens on both cameras. But the main reason is it's not fair, is that it's not fair to EITHER of the cameras. It shows both cameras working in bad light -- which cameras don't like. Both cameras can do a LOT better. But if the light's right, the K10D can, um, do more better. ;-)

Quote:

Other than that, I am getting to the point where it's like analysis paralysis. I think either one will be nice to have, I just want to decide and start learning....

I can so relate. Analysis Paralysis is my middle name. William Analysis Paralysis Porter.

Will

mattdm · 11-05-2007, 06:01 PM

Originally posted by jmdeegan

But some have mentioned the 100d is better in low-light scenarios. How much better?

The maximum ISO of the K10D is 1600, while the K100D goes to 3200. From what I've seen in both cases it's nicest to avoid the extreme end, so ISO 800 and ISO 1600 are reasonable "everyday" limits. This is one stop, so it's exactly the same (in terms of exposure) as going from f/4 to f/2.8 or from 1/30th of a second to 1/60th.

I haven't used my new K10D enough to really test if I like the ISO 1600 output, so this is mostly received wisdom. Some people have posted previously that they are very happy with the K10D at ISO 1600. (I think probably those same people would be happy the the K100D at 3200.)

jmdeegan · 11-05-2007, 06:06 PM

most helpful example i think. sometimes im surprised camera stores don't consider a better try-and-buy type arrangement, because as easy as it is to get in and handle them, i don't think i'll really know how happy i am with any choice, until i get out there and have real-world data.
i think, by the way, that I am partial to A, though I'd guess B's light might be more natural? or at least, it looked more like today, but I am in NY and it wasn't all that sunny, i don't think.

i think whichever I get, will be gotten from amazon, if for no other reason than their good return policy. B and H is close-I could walk there or take a cab-but Amazon's price, at least for the 10d, is marginally cheaper. Tho, it actually sells from Beach, and if I buy from beach directly, I'd only have 15 days, but gain a freebie 2gig card.....

mattdm · 11-05-2007, 07:54 PM

Originally posted by jmdeegan

i think whichever I get, will be gotten from amazon, if for no other reason than their good return policy. B and H is close-I could walk there or take a cab-but Amazon's price, at least for the 10d, is marginally cheaper. Tho, it actually sells from Beach, and if I buy from beach directly, I'd only have 15 days, but gain a freebie 2gig card.....

Amazon seems to be out of their in-house stock, which is why it sells from Beach. A few days ago they had it in stock for $636.15. You can still buy it from them for that, actually -- look at the sidebar on the right -- but it says "Usually ships in 2 to 5 weeks". I don't know how long it'll really take them to get more stock -- it could be a lot less or a lot more. If you buy from another vendor through Amazon, no free shipping or price guarantee, which pretty much negates the advantage of taking that route.

jmdeegan · 11-05-2007, 08:13 PM

those prices are body only, oddly enough for the kit, amazon prices jump alot

my experiences differ tho. I've done the from amazon by way of 3rd party route before, and been covered by the amazon policies. thankfully haven't really needed to use them, hopefully this time will be a similar experience.

so...yup...pulled the k10d trigger

mattdm · 11-06-2007, 05:02 AM

Cool, congratulations.

WMBP · 11-06-2007, 07:48 AM

Originally posted by jmdeegan

i think, by the way, that I am partial to A, though I'd guess B's light might be more natural? or at least, it looked more like today, but I am in NY and it wasn't all that sunny, i don't think.

The photos (found here) were taken 60 seconds apart, from the same perspective, same light. I thought it would be a tolerably good test as I know (from LOTS of previous test shooting in my living room!) that this particular scene would produce a somewhat noisy image. The point is, it's very difficult to see a difference in noise levels in the two photos.

Congrats on your decision, by the way!

Will

budkid · 12-18-2007, 01:01 AM

i am actually having the same drama of which one to choose. I currently bought a k100d super after thanksgiving. But now I am eyeing the k10d. Mainly due to megapixel. I am a tennis coach and take my students pictures at the end of the year. We usually have make a 16x20 photo for everyone. Do you think i can make a 6 megapixel camera turn out that size? ehh...

digitaldevo · 12-18-2007, 06:09 AM

Remember with the K10D you can still get the higher ISOs by simply shooting in RAW and underexposing 1 stop then pushing to +1 in RAW conversion. Same method that Canon uses to achieve ISO3200 in their 20/30/40D cameras.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
10d vs. 100d, seems obvious, right?	old soul	Pentax DSLR Discussion	9	12-09-2008 07:05 AM
Is this a good deal and will it work with my 100D Super	mrpackerguy	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	2	04-15-2008 07:58 PM
100d super, SUPER noisy	Spooked	Pentax DSLR Discussion	11	01-06-2008 10:13 AM
Super 100D w/old lenses	Nuker54	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	5	01-03-2008 03:57 AM
Help with AF-360GZ flash and K-100D Super	mcegoon	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	12-09-2007 12:32 PM

11-05-2007, 03:27 PM	#31
jmdeegan Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: nyc Photos: Gallery Posts: 564 Original Poster	OK, I think this is the last question I am trying to understand before I decide.... it's looking more like the 10d at this point (missed out on all the low-priced used 100d's) But some have mentioned the 100d is better in low-light scenarios. How much better? For example, last night I was taking pictures in my living room, just messing around with the wife's canon S2 on continuous mode, and after the first shot, there was no flash. so the rest of the pictures are pretty much useless, even though the room itself was decently lit. Just trying to understand this comment which was made earlier in the thread-is it a substantial difference, or one where I just need to adjust a little differently with one camera versus the other? Other than that, I am getting to the point where it's like analysis paralysis. I think either one will be nice to have, I just want to decide and start learning....

11-05-2007, 04:09 PM	#32
WMBP Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,482	Originally posted by jmdeegan But some have mentioned the 100d is better in low-light scenarios. How much better? For example, last night I was taking pictures in my living room, just messing around with the wife's canon S2 on continuous mode, and after the first shot, there was no flash. so the rest of the pictures are pretty much useless, even though the room itself was decently lit. Just trying to understand this comment which was made earlier in the thread-is it a substantial difference, or one where I just need to adjust a little differently with one camera versus the other? Either the K100D or the K10D is going to be significantly better in low-light than the Canon PowerShot S2 (or S3, or S5). So forget about that. Now, is the K10D significantly worse than the K100D? Depends on who you ask. Ask a K100D owner, and the answer may be yes. Ask a K10D owner and the answer is either no (that's my answer) or not significant enough to offset the other advantages of the K10D (my other answer). I just shot two photos here in my living room. Both were taken at ISO 1600, f/4 @ 1/50th sec. One was shot with the K10D, the other was taken with the Pentax ist DS. Click here to see the two shots. I uploaded them to a Picasa Web Albums gallery so I could leave 'em large for comparison. Marked 'em A and B. I think the 6 MP ist DS's noise should be pretty similar to what you'd see with a K100D. You tell me, which is better or worse? Which was taken with which camera? NOTE that I didn't use the same lens on both cameras. One camera had the Pentax 16-45 f/4, the other hand the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 macro. The photos were given NO post-processing at all. I opened them in Picasa, which can read PEF files but not interpret the EXIF data in them. Because both were shot raw, but both are now the same size, one of the files has been sized down more than the other. But otherwise these are pretty much straight from the cameras. It's not a fair test for many reasons. Perhaps I should have used the same lens on both cameras. But the main reason is it's not fair, is that it's not fair to EITHER of the cameras. It shows both cameras working in bad light -- which cameras don't like. Both cameras can do a LOT better. But if the light's right, the K10D can, um, do more better. ;-) Quote: Other than that, I am getting to the point where it's like analysis paralysis. I think either one will be nice to have, I just want to decide and start learning.... I can so relate. Analysis Paralysis is my middle name. William Analysis Paralysis Porter. Will

11-05-2007, 06:01 PM	#33
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by jmdeegan But some have mentioned the 100d is better in low-light scenarios. How much better? The maximum ISO of the K10D is 1600, while the K100D goes to 3200. From what I've seen in both cases it's nicest to avoid the extreme end, so ISO 800 and ISO 1600 are reasonable "everyday" limits. This is one stop, so it's exactly the same (in terms of exposure) as going from f/4 to f/2.8 or from 1/30th of a second to 1/60th. I haven't used my new K10D enough to really test if I like the ISO 1600 output, so this is mostly received wisdom. Some people have posted previously that they are very happy with the K10D at ISO 1600. (I think probably those same people would be happy the the K100D at 3200.)

11-05-2007, 06:06 PM	#34
jmdeegan Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: nyc Photos: Gallery Posts: 564 Original Poster	most helpful example i think. sometimes im surprised camera stores don't consider a better try-and-buy type arrangement, because as easy as it is to get in and handle them, i don't think i'll really know how happy i am with any choice, until i get out there and have real-world data. i think, by the way, that I am partial to A, though I'd guess B's light might be more natural? or at least, it looked more like today, but I am in NY and it wasn't all that sunny, i don't think. i think whichever I get, will be gotten from amazon, if for no other reason than their good return policy. B and H is close-I could walk there or take a cab-but Amazon's price, at least for the 10d, is marginally cheaper. Tho, it actually sells from Beach, and if I buy from beach directly, I'd only have 15 days, but gain a freebie 2gig card.....

11-05-2007, 07:54 PM	#35
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by jmdeegan i think whichever I get, will be gotten from amazon, if for no other reason than their good return policy. B and H is close-I could walk there or take a cab-but Amazon's price, at least for the 10d, is marginally cheaper. Tho, it actually sells from Beach, and if I buy from beach directly, I'd only have 15 days, but gain a freebie 2gig card..... Amazon seems to be out of their in-house stock, which is why it sells from Beach. A few days ago they had it in stock for $636.15. You can still buy it from them for that, actually -- look at the sidebar on the right -- but it says "Usually ships in 2 to 5 weeks". I don't know how long it'll really take them to get more stock -- it could be a lot less or a lot more. If you buy from another vendor through Amazon, no free shipping or price guarantee, which pretty much negates the advantage of taking that route.

11-05-2007, 08:13 PM	#36
jmdeegan Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: nyc Photos: Gallery Posts: 564 Original Poster	those prices are body only, oddly enough for the kit, amazon prices jump alot my experiences differ tho. I've done the from amazon by way of 3rd party route before, and been covered by the amazon policies. thankfully haven't really needed to use them, hopefully this time will be a similar experience. so...yup...pulled the k10d trigger

11-06-2007, 05:02 AM	#37
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Cool, congratulations.

11-06-2007, 07:48 AM	#38
WMBP Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,482	Originally posted by jmdeegan i think, by the way, that I am partial to A, though I'd guess B's light might be more natural? or at least, it looked more like today, but I am in NY and it wasn't all that sunny, i don't think. The photos (found here) were taken 60 seconds apart, from the same perspective, same light. I thought it would be a tolerably good test as I know (from LOTS of previous test shooting in my living room!) that this particular scene would produce a somewhat noisy image. The point is, it's very difficult to see a difference in noise levels in the two photos. Congrats on your decision, by the way! Will

12-18-2007, 01:01 AM	#39
budkid Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: California Posts: 70	i am actually having the same drama of which one to choose. I currently bought a k100d super after thanksgiving. But now I am eyeing the k10d. Mainly due to megapixel. I am a tennis coach and take my students pictures at the end of the year. We usually have make a 16x20 photo for everyone. Do you think i can make a 6 megapixel camera turn out that size? ehh...

12-18-2007, 06:09 AM	#40
digitaldevo Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: PA, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 154	Remember with the K10D you can still get the higher ISOs by simply shooting in RAW and underexposing 1 stop then pushing to +1 in RAW conversion. Same method that Canon uses to achieve ISO3200 in their 20/30/40D cameras.