Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-24-2007, 11:25 AM   #1
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Abergavenny, Wales
Posts: 23
K100D vis-a-vis K10D

I bought a K100D earlier on in the year and find it a superb camera in every way. I have always used Pentax film cameras so was predisposed to the new digital anyway, but it has surpassed my expectations, not least in pleaureable handling and ease of use. This is vital to me as I am an artist making photomontages and collages rather than a photographer per se, and cart the thing around with me all the time and in many differing situations. I have been considering acquiring a K10D instead as I sometimes exhibit at A3 and above, and do a fair amount of cropping. However, the K10D does look a bit more cumbersome and is weightier. Will the extra pixels make a significant difference to the non-photocritical eye to the extent that the 500 quid or so will be worth laying out on a new camera rather than on more 2nd hand lenses (old SLR type rather than digital) for example? And what other advantages might the K10D have for me as an artist?

11-24-2007, 01:12 PM   #2
Forum Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sydney Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 73
My wife has the K100D and I have the K10D. There is no difference in results to the non photocritical eye, and very little to the photocritical.

Yes the K100D is marginally lighter than the K10D - but when I use her camera I really miss the extra features on mine. The K10D is just an awesome camera. The difference is that the K100 is an entry level and the K10 an expert level camera- that's just below pro level.

I suggest downloading the K10 manual and comparing the difference to your K100.

You can download it here: http://tinyurl.com/2thmhe

Rusty
11-24-2007, 01:56 PM   #3
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Abergavenny, Wales
Posts: 23
Original Poster
ch reply

Thanks for yuour comments, especially valuable as you are able to provide a direct in-use comparison to a purely technical one. Have you been able to compare photo sizes beyond A4, by any chance, to assess pixelation qualities?
11-24-2007, 08:22 PM   #4
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by chris hall Quote
However, the K10D does look a bit more cumbersome and is weightier.
No question the K10D is heavier, although it's still relatively compact. After using it for a little while coming from the K100D, the main observation is that it feels more solid rather than more burdensome. I definitely notice that I can't get away with holding it with one hand like I did with the K100D in a pinch. (Hey, that's what the SR is for, right? )

QuoteQuote:
Will the extra pixels make a significant difference to the non-photocritical eye to the extent that the 500 quid or so will be worth laying out on a new camera rather than on more 2nd hand lenses (old SLR type rather than digital) for example? And what other advantages might the K10D have for me as an artist?
The pixels, meh, not a big deal, but they will provide an advantage when shooting at low ISO. There's other things to consider, though. The ease of access to basic photographic settings via the dual-wheel controls is amazing. Plus, having things like metering mode available at your fingertips rather than buried in the menu means you're more likely to make appropriate use of it rather than finding one setting and leaving it there. And you've got better lighting options, like trailing-curtain flash and wireless flash (next up on my own wantlist). Oh, and the ability to use ISOs in fractional stops between the standard 100,200,400,800,1600 lets you better fine-tune exposure.

I shoot primarily in JPEG, so I really appreciate the camera's advanced options for JPEG processing (I just wish there were even more). The custom/preset white balance menu is pure genius.

11-25-2007, 12:45 AM   #5
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Abergavenny, Wales
Posts: 23
Original Poster
Many thanks. Definite food for thought. I notice on another thread that the K100D performs better in low light. Do you have any comments on this?

CH

Last edited by chris hall; 11-25-2007 at 12:55 AM.
11-25-2007, 08:14 PM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 835
The weight issue is a personal thing. I find the K10 the heaviest camera I can manage and when my tennis elbow problems flare up I can't manage it at all, where the K100 won't bother it much. But I'm a small female, so you might not find the extra weight a disadvantage at all. I do love having the controls handier than on the K100, and there have been times when the extra mp have come in handy.

If my two cameras are typical, the K100 is better in low light. I don't like the ISO 3200 on the K100, but it does offer it, while the K10 doesn't. The K10's ISO 1600 is OK if I'm careful not to underexpose a scene (overexpose slightly is OK) but not as good/useable as the K100 at the same ISO. I use that mode quite often and the pictures look good with a little Neat Image processing. If you are using a tripod and can use slower shutter speeds (and slower ISO levels) it doesn't matter - the pictures my two cameras produce at ISO 800 and below are about the same to my eyes.
11-25-2007, 10:08 PM   #7
Pentaxian
jgredline's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: LosAngeles, Ca.
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,587
I also like u crop allot of pics and the K10D defiantly is the way to go for this. More pixels means more to work with.
11-25-2007, 11:23 PM   #8
Pentaxian
rvannatta's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Apiary, Oregon
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,176
QuoteOriginally posted by chris hall Quote
Many thanks. Definite food for thought. I notice on another thread that the K100D performs better in low light. Do you have any comments on this?

CH
I wouldn't rush into changing. I bought a K2 in 1975 and used it satisfactorily for 20 years.
I doubt if I would have had 'better pictures' if I had bought the 20 models inbetween.

The issue with the digital world is just learning how to use all the buttons and when to use them. For all the automation, nearly every photo can be made a little better if you tweek
some setting. For example you can adjust the logic for how it focuses, how it calculates the exposure, and a host of other things. You can increase the quality of your photos more by mastering the buttons that the k100 has and adding some different lenses to your bag of tricks than you can by changing bodies.

I waited for 3 good reasons to buy a new body and havn't been sorry as I upgraded from
an Pentax '*ist'. In that change I got more MP's, but also shake reduction, and greatly improved internal processing speed.

Initially, I also had very high hopes for the SDM which isn't on the K100 unless you have a super model, but alas, its day hasn't come yet so there is another year or two before not having SDM will matter much.

11-25-2007, 11:25 PM   #9
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,536
QuoteOriginally posted by chris hall Quote
Many thanks. Definite food for thought. I notice on another thread that the K100D performs better in low light. Do you have any comments on this?

CH
This is a direct result of fewer pixels in the same space. Each sensor pixel in the K100D is larger and gathers more light than those in the K10D. This requires the K10D to amplify the signal a bit more. There are several solutions to this problem.

First, use the lowest ISO you can possible get a way with. Use a tripod or the SR when necessary. I just tried some hand held shots of our canary with the 50-135 at minimum focusing distance, lit by two 60 watt light bulbs, with SR. Not bad, not good, but a good try.

Second, use a good noise reduction software. There are several out there at very attractive prices that do a decent job.

Third, and more difficult, check out ETTR. It takes a bit of thinking, particularly as it is exactly the opposite need from slide film. Briefly, you expose at the maximum possible exposure that does not blow out any highlights you want to keep.

Enjoy whichever camera you purchase, even if it is (horrors) not a Pentax.

Last edited by Canada_Rockies; 11-25-2007 at 11:26 PM. Reason: The second sentence was unclear without the models listed.
11-26-2007, 07:00 AM   #10
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,197
QuoteOriginally posted by rvannatta Quote
I bought a K2 in 1975 and used it satisfactorily for 20 years.
I doubt if I would have had 'better pictures' if I had bought the 20 models inbetween.

Sweet! Another former K2 user! What a great camera! Everything that photographers love about a K1000, only vastly better. Mine eventually died and got replaced first by an LX and now a K10D, but the K2 was easily every bit as satisfying a camera.
11-26-2007, 09:59 AM   #11
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by rvannatta Quote
I wouldn't rush into changing. I bought a K2 in 1975 and used it satisfactorily for 20 years.
I doubt if I would have had 'better pictures' if I had bought the 20 models inbetween.
Did you continue to use film from 1975 the whole time?
11-26-2007, 11:52 AM   #12
ycl
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2007
Location: NY, NY, USA
Posts: 37
My experience

QuoteOriginally posted by chris hall Quote
Thanks for yuour comments, especially valuable as you are able to provide a direct in-use comparison to a purely technical one. Have you been able to compare photo sizes beyond A4, by any chance, to assess pixelation qualities?
I bought a K100d in March, and then "upgraded" to the K10d last month. The following are some of the key advantages to the K10, based solely on my subjective use:

1. Much easier to access various controls. I shoot principally in Manual mode, so the 2 wheels speed things up considerably. Also much easier access to metering modes.

2. Much better White Balance adjustments -- much easier to use, much finer adjustments.

2A. Fine-tune adjustment of ISO speed.

3. Weather sealing. Not that weather ever damaged the K100, but with the weather getting rougher now in northern climes, I feel much more comfortable with my K10 around my neck.

4. Battery lasts a LOT longer. Maybe my AA rechargeables in the K100 weren't the best, but the K10 sure seems to last a long longer.

5. Viewfinder is a good deal larger / brighter.

6. Cropping is much easier due to larger file size / greater pixel count. Or so I think.

7. The customizable "USER" mode -- I've found this to be useful at times, and I don't think the K100 has it.

8. Playback function (for reviewing images ('chimping')) seems to move faster (deleting images, e.g., seems quicker), and is also more "detailed" -- e.g., you can see not just a single histogram, but the Red, Blue, and Green histograms; also, you can "zoom" up to 20X (rather than the K100's 12X) to see whether an image is in focus).

***

Those are the principal advantages I've found. Though I've read that there's a difference, I have NOT found that autofocus is faster, or that the Shake Reduction is more effective, on the K10. But that's me. (And as for the "dust reduction" function, well, I'm skeptical about its usefulness generally).

The one distinct disadvantage to the K10 is, as many have already mentioned, is the noise at high ISOs. I'm by no means a pixel peeper, and I generally couldn't care less about noise. But I find that often, even 800 ISO on the K10 produces too much noise. K100's noise seems much better.
11-27-2007, 04:06 AM   #13
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Abergavenny, Wales
Posts: 23
Original Poster
rumours of K200D

Thanks for everybody's advice. The one-hand shooting and low-light quality are very important to me. Will the latter be affected in the rumoured new K200D which should be 10 megapixels when it arrives, I wonder? The grapevine says it should emerge at the end of January. As I love my K100D anyway, I am in no hurry to switch, and the K10D might drop in price when the K20D replacement is in the shops.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
artist, camera, dslr, k100d, k10d, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Battery Grip for K100D/K110D/K100D Super Camera, K10D/K20D D-LI50 Battery frank Sold Items 12 05-30-2009 06:10 PM
K10D vs K100D AF pdxbmw Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 10-13-2008 08:23 PM
k10D or k100D james Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 05-12-2007 09:26 AM
K100D v K10D Christian Pentax DSLR Discussion 21 04-26-2007 05:37 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:45 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top