[thePiRaTE!!]

ding, ding!

I've done some initial and layman tests comparing my K10 and K20 to satisfy my feelings that the K20 was worth the extra outlay. I wasn't convinced at first, but my testing is showing some advantages. Worth the cash? Have look. Please feel free to add your own tests and constructive criticisms.

Pentax K20 vs K10 comparisons - a photoset on Flickr

[aegisphan]

Have you tried to scale down the K20D's image instead of blowing the K10D's up? Since the K10D has less resolution, it has less resolving power; thus if you blow it up, the inherent weakness will be exagerrated.

For the brick wall shots on the left most, I feel that the K20D with high dynamic and the K10D has similar softness. I have to agree that with the dynamic on, it seems to have a little better color trading for the loss of shadow details.

[Gooshin]

why would you not be convinced?

out dated CCD vs new age CMOS and better SR.

you people are weird.

[-=JoN=-]

yay for brick wall photos....................

im not going to post any bricks of sort.....

my initial impressions of both....awb works better on the 20d.
it is less noise in 1600 and the shutter is quieter.

i may post some shots, but...it's of private nature....if i can find anything thats more or less neutral..then maybe..i've showed chris and ucsdeacon some....and they said....what i said when i first took them...."nice"

[aegisphan]

why would you not be convinced?

out dated CCD vs new age CMOS and better SR.

you people are weird.

Uhm, I didn't say that the K20D was not better. I just said that if we want a fair comparison, scaling down would do a better job. The K20D is definitely better, but how much better, that's what the OP tried to show. And I don't know what you mean by "you people".

[thePiRaTE!!]

My angle is that I wasn't blown away by the changes that it was worth the extra outlay (IE money, cash, dineros, rubles, pesos ya know?) especially at todays values. I'm not trying to prove the K10 is better. I'm suggesting it is still perhaps a better value.

But, I do appreciate the thoughts. I definately am NOT scientifically minded enough to be taken as gold on these tests, I'm sure there are factors which I have not 100% controlled which could skew results (they are MF after all) but it does give an idea what you're getting into, and in the end, is it worth double the money? Thats for each to decide, but these samples will maybe help, either way.

EDIT - I'll just add that, sorry for the brick wall, lol. I was shooting from my balcony to the building across the street. I wanted to see the extra resolution in action for MYSELF and thought I would share. I should add a warning its a brick wall so people can be spared the horror eh?

[-=JoN=-]

for the value, the k10 is a steal. the 20 is a new body, and as w/ many new releases it's always at a higher price. it will drop eventually (price) but not anytime soon. for me, it was an extra 300 bux...(paid 1100 for the k10 w/ the kit) . was the 300 dollar upgrade worth it for me. i'd say yeah, they improved enough of it . but for the price of a 10 now, which has been out since late 06, compared to a just released 20d, no......the price comparison is unfair to the k20d.

(just a bit of background, i bought the k10d first day it was available here in the east coast. as w/ the k20)

[Gooshin]

Uhm, I didn't say that the K20D was not better. I just said that if we want a fair comparison, scaling down would do a better job. The K20D is definitely better, but how much better, that's what the OP tried to show. And I don't know what you mean by "you people".

my response was directed at the OP,

"you people" is anyone who seems to think that a digital camera manufacturer would be so silly as to produce a worse camera than it offered before.

the k20d is already better than the k10d on paper no matter how you spin it, and rightfully so in real life.

[24X36NOW]

I don't get why scaling up OR down the resolution of either camera is relevant. If you want to compare the K10D and the K20D, just shoot the same image at each camera's native resolution and compare the results, and that will show the true differences.

[Gooshin]

I don't get why scaling up OR down the resolution of either camera is relevant. If you want to compare the K10D and the K20D, just shoot the same image at each camera's native resolution and compare the results, and that will show the true differences.

no you see some of the more mathematicaly inclined believe that per-pixel-quality is nearly identical

but since the end result is what matters...

[thePiRaTE!!]

I don't get why scaling up OR down the resolution of either camera is relevant. If you want to compare the K10D and the K20D, just shoot the same image at each camera's native resolution and compare the results, and that will show the true differences.

Its true, and at the size we would mostly enjoy those pictures, they are very similar (part of my question - worth double the price?) Where the shots were taken from and with what was the same, I thought by increasing the resolution of the K10 shot to that of the K20, the increased resolution of the K20 would be graphically realized. I just wanted to see it for myself. It might not really be practical, I admit that.

Anyways, I appreciate the view point.

[Sailor]

Its true, and at the size we would mostly enjoy those pictures, they are very similar (part of my question - worth double the price?) Where the shots were taken from and with what was the same, I thought by increasing the resolution of the K10 shot to that of the K20, the increased resolution of the K20 would be graphically realized. I just wanted to see it for myself. It might not really be practical, I admit that.

Anyways, I appreciate the view point.

Thanks much for posting the comparison. These images are real data that help those of us who've not yet decided whether to spring for a K20D make the decision.

Thanks again.

Jer