[amc654]

Am sort of planning to upgrade/replace/add to my k100d super (which I love) later this year, but not sure with what... I'd like something newer, but not ready for any sort of "advanced" dslr. Would appreciate some opinions on "what" to get.

OK, so megapixel count is almost irrelevant.... The 6.1 of the k100d is fine for what I do. I don't print very often; my shots are for the web, so higher count is actually not good, because of the resizing I have to do. Don't use scene modes, except when doing some "snap shot recreational" photos--which isn't often. So that's not important.

Image quality and accurate color reproduction are crucial. The first has a lot to do with the lens, I realize, and I'll add lenses as needed. I shoot indoors in decent, but not ultra bright, light (fluorescent, at a "moderate" daylight temp of 5500 deg K). I generally don't use a flash. I think the biggest issue for me with the k100d super is the white balance. It's far better than what I had before, and most colors reproduce well, but those pesky reds and blue-greens still fall short. As I understand it, most cameras can't capture those colors 100% accurately, but even when I try to do a manual WB set, I can't get them close enough (well, that may have more to do with me than the camera....). I like having the top LCD. I can take or leave live view.

From what I've read here and on other forums, reviews and comparisons, I'm leaning toward the k200D (was an ad for one at a great price here this a.m., but it's disappeared). I don't need a k-7 or k-5.... Although there's a k-7 being advertised here at a great price! I was debating the CMOS vs. CCD sensor issue, but everything I've read seems to indicate that for my purposes, CCD is better.

Not sure the 200d is a big step up from the 100ds, but I don't need a big step. Thought about the k10d, but I want something newer, and it seems a bit larger than I want.

Oh, and I don't like the smaller cameras. I love the way my k100ds feels in my hands. Now, when I hold my old Panasonic FZ, it feels like a toy! I like the "35mm slr" feel of my camera, and would like one about the same size. I have fairly small hands, but the k100ds works perfectly for me.

I know people love the k-x, but I don't think it's the right one for me. Any thoughts? How does the k20d do vs the 200d, in real life?

Even though I'm not planning on buying another camera right now, it usually takes me weeks, if not months, to do my research on which camera to get, then longer to find what I want in a condition and at a price that I can live with. Though I think my husband is lusting after my k100ds, so the upgrade may happen sooner than I think.... Thanks!

[Adam]

What about the K-r? It's just as simple as your K100D but it's got more features (such as live view), better image quality and better performance overall. I'd get my hands on one while it's still available in stores!

The K200D is really the only mid-range camera Pentax has produced to date: it's got more controls that the intro-level cameras (i.e. a top LCD and support for a grip) while not having the additional external buttons of the K10/20D. The K200 has the same sensor as the K10 so you can expect similar image quality, but I'd still say the K-x and K-r are better.

6MP really isn't that much these days- so even though some people don't like the noise that the K20 exhibits at high ISOs, it'll still get you better pictures in the long run

[SpecialK]

If you don't want an "advanced" DSLR, why do you want to upgrade?

[Anvh]

why upgrade indeed, get some nice glass instead maybe?

By the sound off it you don't do a lot off high ISO work so there is little to gain with the K200D or Kx in terms of image quality although they might feel a bit more snappier to use those cameras.
You can off course save for a k5, probably when the new pentax will be announced over some months you might be able to get one secondhand for a good price.

[amc654]

Thanks, all, for your responses!

Adam, never even thought about the k-r; duh on me. Not sure why, but probably 'cuz I can't afford one right now--but maybe by the time I'm ready to buy. And I agree that today, having more than 6.1 MP is a plus--especially if I start doing other things with the camera.

The reason I want another camera is that the review button or function has stopped working (think it's the button, 'cuz the screen and everything else is working fine). It's not a really big deal, as I've just set the "instant" preview to 3 seconds instead of 1 so I can take a peek at each shot as I take it. But that slows me down. Normally I review in batches to see if I need to make any adjustments and re-shoot anything. Can't do that now. I've looked into having it checked out and diagnosed; it'll cost almost what the camera's worth. So it certainly seems as if a new-used camera is a better answer.

If it weren't for that one issue, I'd just use this for a good while longer (I generally keep my "work" cameras three to four years, and I've only had this about a year). So that's why I said "upgrade/replace/add to," 'cuz I'm pretty flexible. It doesn't have to be a "better" unit with more features, but it doesn't have to be a direct replacement, either. I can handle a more advanced camera (as I'm used to 35mm slr's with not much automatic functioning), but not the most advanced. Nor do I want to. So I can go either way. But I'm getting the "bug" again after having had this, so I'm thinking of doing some recreational and creative photography--and I imagine a more advanced unit will let me stretch a bit more. Not that I need that right this minute.

I was going to sell the k100ds to help pay for the new one, but if my husband wants it, he can have it, and it'll also give me a back-up. I think he'll really enjoy it, as he's more than eager to move up from his Pany FZ.

Anvh, you're right--I don't do a lot of high ISO work--mostly from 200 up to about 800, usually 400. Shoulda mentioned that before.

[amc654]

never even thought about the k-r; duh on me. Not sure why, but probably 'cuz I can't afford one right now

Ah, after reading the specs again, I remembered that it also is because it has video, which I don't need at all, and the CMOS sensor. Although that may not really be an issue, I guess. What I've read, now and awhile ago, indicates that CCD sensors are typically better in low-light situations, and I'm almost always shooting indoors. But I guess that varies as well, depending on the size of the sensor (i.e., some brands' cmos are better than others' ccd in that respect, and vice versa). And I really don't need the 12.4 MP; even going up to 10.2 is an improvement. I'm not an MP obsessor.... I'm always amazed when colleagues of mine assume they have to run out and buy the newest camera with the most MP, even though they'll probably never shoot at the highest res. Or, if they do, they end up resizing so much they lose whatever they think they gained to begin with....

But the k-r has the front/back focus correction, which I'm assuming will, or may, give me sharper images?

All in all, I'd rather get a used, less-expensive body and put the extra $$ toward a second, good lens. I just ordered the 18-55mm kit lens in the "II" version (not WR), which, as I understand it, will work better with the newer bodies than the old kit lens.

[normhead]

When I went from my k100D to my k20D, the image size meant I needed a new computer. My old one didn't have enough space for the new 14 MP files and the extra processing power to process files that size meant my processor was too slow. I also needed a 4 GB memory cards since upgraded to 8. Upgrading is fraught with a myriad of un-expected issues, all of which cost money. Don't forget the second battery. It's not just the cost of the camera. OH , and to get the deal I wanted, I had to buy yet another 18-55 kit lens.. those things however can be recycled as paperweights.

[amc654]

normhead, I never shoot at highest res, so that's not a problem! I assume your application requires you shoot at 14MP, but even with my k100ds, the most I ever set it at is 4. I hear you about the unexpected expenses in upgrading, though.... I've been forced to buy another 18-55mm lens, so will look for just the body next time, and get something in the 28 or 35-ish to 70 to 135-ish range.

So which camera ultimately do you like the best--your k100d or the k20d?

Oh, I know one other thing I'd like in a newer camera--I wish it had a setting in between 1.5 and 4 MP. My Olympus had a 2.1 setting, and that was pretty ideal for the web. Does anyone know where I can find what the "in-between" settings are, or at least the lowest. I've read the specs here and in other places, but they mostly just give the maximum MP spec, not the minimum or the individual settings.

TIA!

[ScreamingIdiot]

My opinion, for what it's worth, wait for CES 2012 to end this thursday before you decide. You never know...

[amc654]

My opinion, for what it's worth, wait for CES 2012 to end this thursday before you decide. You never know...

Do you think they might announce some new models and/or discontinuations of some older ones? In which case, a newer older one (hmmm) might end up able to be had at a decent price.

Well, I'm not buying for awhile, anyway, so I'll be on the alert for any announcements that come after Thursday; thanks for the heads up!

[Peter Anson]

I bought a nicely priced Km body to use with my AF lenses, leaving the K100DS for M and M42 lenses. This has worked out very well. The 10mp file size is OK and hasn't upset the computer. no changes to workflow needed.

[pinholecam]

I think the question is what it your budget?

I had a K100D and frankly speaking, it was not wow! when I moved over to a K7.
It just did not have that big leap that I wanted. (ie. AF, noise, ISO performance).
But the K5 was a great WOW! over the K7.
Oddly, so was the Kx over the K7 except for build and fast access buttons which the K7 was much better. But considering the price and the performance of the Kx, it was a significant leap over cameras of that generation.

I'd certainly get a 2nd hand Kx (or Kr) over a K7 and those before it.
Yes, its a lower end body with a bit lower build and less buttons for fast access and a few small features missing over the higher end K10, K20, K7, but it delivers where it counts (the image quality).
The fine grain produced by the camera just allows much more to be pushed out of it in PP.
High ISO performance also means shooting kit lenses or commercial zooms that are usually at f5.6 at the long end and not having to worry too much about IQ loss (up to about ISO1600)
Even things like macro shots benefit with the higher ISO to pick up some ambient light or to shoot at ISO400-800 and lessen the strain on flash recycle times.

[amc654]

The fine grain produced by the camera just allows much more to be pushed out of it in PP. High ISO performance also means shooting kit lenses or commercial zooms that are usually at f5.6 at the long end and not having to worry too much about IQ loss (up to about ISO1600) Even things like macro shots benefit with the higher ISO to pick up some ambient light or to shoot at ISO400-800 and lessen the strain on flash recycle times.

I guess I'm surprised that the k-7 didn't give you that much more over the k100d... OK, so what you are saying, then, is that even though I don't really need the higher MP count, the k-r or k-x is going to give me better IQ than any of the previous generation models, even using the same kit lens, including in the 200 to 800 ISO range? Is that correct? Because, in the end, as I said, it's all about IQ and color. Actually, color reproduction is probably a hair more important than IQ--for example in some cases (not, e.g., when shooting jewelry), I can live with a softer shot but the color is critical.

And, remember, my k100ds is my first dslr--I moved up from Olympus and Panasonic ultrazoom P & S models--so, to me it's super! Especially since it's easier to use than I thought it would be. LOL.... I'm sure down the road a bit, I'll feel the way I do now about those cameras. They were great when I started using them, but you get so you want/need "more."

I wonder if I should just keep pushing my k100ds along until the k-5 prices drop.... But that won't be for awhile, I'm sure.... So, I'll keep my eyes open for a used k-r, I think. I'm not in a hurry, so I have the luxury of waiting till I can find one.

[yusuf]

My opinion, for what it's worth, wait for CES 2012 to end this thursday before you decide. You never know...

+1, I would be a bit hesitant to invest in Pentax at this moment, till a new body is announced, unless off course you already have enough investment in Pentax in terms of lenses.

K-x is a wonderful camera and I would suggest it over any other camera as it's the latest Pentax model with no malfunctioning. Both k-r and k-5 have couple of issues including focus in low light.

[amc654]

I want to thank everyone who has responded here! It's been extremely helpful! It's helped me decide that going to a k200d isn't going to give me enough "oomph" from the k100ds to make it worthwhile. However, I'm going to keep my eyes out for a k-7 or a used k-r. After reading up on the k-7, I'm sure it's not "too much" camera for me, and it also sounds as if the extended white-balance controls are going to make color reproduction much less of an issue as it has been over the last 8 years....

I think I'll get the ergonomics and feel I like with the k-7 and the functions I need, and it has both 2 & 6 MP settings (according to the specs I read), so that will work for my web work, and if I ever need more, it's there.... And, though I never thought I'd "need" a WR camera, I could take it on our trips to the beach and maybe do some just-for-fun shots instead of just-for-work.

By the time I'm ready to buy, I'm hoping the price will have come down a tad, as well.