[FastPhotography]

Yeah, I said it! I just don't understand why somebody would pay $1000-1400 for a camera that isn't THAT much improved from the K10D.

Yes, it has a very nice sensor. I'll give it that much.

-Live view? It's been discussed. Some will use it, others will not. Some say they will use it, but never will.
-PC sync socket? A hot shoe adapter costs $20 or less.
-Dust alert system? Tiny improvement.
-Expanded Dynamic Range? Okay, this may come in handy for picky photographers or portraitists, but for the majority of us, there's Photoshop, GIMP, Aperture, Corel, etc.
-Custom image functions? This may just be my opinion, but whoop dee doo! Again, IMHO this is just for a picky photographer that doesn't want to post-process his/her pictures.
-Still sync speed is 180.
-2.7-inch LCD. Almost all the others are 3"
-Shake reduction system still anything but extraordinary.
-AND still only 3 FPS

Now, don't get me wrong. For the photographer who demands perfect IQ and huge-sized images, this is a great camera. But that's not everybody. The Canon 40D, Nikon D300, and Sony a-700 are all SO much better, judging by specs.

PLEASE note, though, that this was written by an owner of a K10D, not a K20D. I've never owned one. I do not mean to offend anybody by this; I'm only sharing my opinion, and starting a debate. People keep saying what they love about this camera, but IMHO it's not that big of an upgrade from the K10D. Good luck against 40D, D300, and A-700.

[jgredline]

Yea, it is always those who do not own one that are haters..But to answer your question....

Yeah, I said it! I just don't understand why somebody would pay $1000-1400 for a camera that isn't THAT much improved from the K10D.

Because it is cool.

[FastPhotography]

This is true, and this is also not true. When the K10D came out, I wanted one SO badly! But when the K20D came out, I said "meh.."

Because it is cool.

I don't mean to be a jerk with crappy arguements, but does "being cool" justify spending $1000-1400?

[jgredline]

This is true, and this is also not true. When the K10D came out, I wanted one SO badly! But when the K20D came out, I said "meh.."



I don't mean to be a jerk with crappy arguements, but does "being cool" justify spending $1000-1400?

Yep, It sure does....You see. there will be no answer that will satisfy you. You already have an agenda it appears and I am sure you have had the K10D and the K20D side by side and compared them and you came to the conclusion that it is a waste of money and that those other brands are better based on specs...Hmmm, Last I saw no other had a 14.6 mp sensor, but many have a 10.0 MP sensor...

So I go back to my original answer...Because it is cool....

---

Last edited by jgredline; 06-15-2008 at 10:16 PM.

[Jewelltrail]

Fastphotography I like your post--it should stir up the waters here for a while--LOL. Here is a TOPTEN List for your asking.

10) To a landscape photographer who almost never exceeds ISO 400, these words from Pop Photo, "At 2350 lines of resolution at ISO 100-400, the K20D delivers slightly higher resolution than the Nikon D300", bring tears of joy.

9) Have you seen the stunning images, which are merely crops, which Pentax Poke just posted? It shows how a K20 crop can even dwarf a K10 full res.

8) 3 FPS, at 15mp, is a huge leap over 3 FPS, at 10mp

7) For some photographers, huge prints are a necessity, not an anomaly

6) It is nice to have a sensor so good that it won't even let you use bad glass with it.

5) The shake reduction is an improvement over the K10

4) I'd rather have extended dynamic range than be without it

3) 15 mp is a rare spec alongside a camera--10 mp is commonplace

2) As jgredline says----"It is cool."

1) And the top reason why the K20 is preferred over the K10, scroll down




It gives us all new things to discuss here at the forum!


Regards,


Ernest


"Humanity subdues inhumanity as water subdues fire."

Mencius 6A:18.

[PentaxPoke]

Smells like a troll post, but maybe not since you are an actual Pentax owner, so I'll bite:

You conveniently forgot to list the biggest advantage of the k20d over the k10d: 2 stops more ISO capability. I have both cameras, so don't tell me this isn't a big deal. k20d beats the k10d at 1600, and will produce useable shots to iso 6400. Search a bit on this forum and you will see the comparisons and tests.

Just a few threads you should consider:

Here:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/27927-pentax-k20d-...o-gallery.html

Here:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/26796-k20d-high-is...00-6400-a.html

Here:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/27118-k10d-vs-k20d-iso-1600-test.html

[AVANT]

We all know specs sells, thanks for point that out. If Pentax was going in the specs race, they will fail, just like Sony is currently, only faster because they aren't as well funded.

The whole point of the K20D is that it's everything you loved from the K10D, but improved. The ergonomics, usability, and image quality relative to the price is what sold me on my K10D, and they are still there in the K20D.

The Nikon D300 costs 40% more for the body alone. Personally, I do not feel the D300 is a 40% better camera, but the point is that the cameras aren't the same class. The D80 is dated and there is no replacement for it yet, but THAT'S supposed to be the K20D class competition.

The Canon 40D is an improved sensor from the XTi placed into the 30D with some faster frame rate tweaks and a Live-view feature (that you are disregarding as useful)
If the K20D was an improved K10D sensor (which still won't be as good as the current sensor) made to shoot 6.5fps, would that excite you enough to say "I want a K20D!"? For me, that's a No.

Maybe you feel the K20D isn't as good bang for your buck, but you should remember that the K10D was an EXCEPTIONAL value.

[Mallee Boy]

Hi Fastphotography,
A good debate never hurt anyone....much.
I upgraded from the DS to the K20D, so why not the K10D or an offering from Canon or Nikon?

Canon I will not (never, ever) buy on principal due to a certain posters constant praise of it.
Nikon I would consider, but that means a whole system change, so before I do that I will exhaust the options with Pentax, given that i now have a reasonable investment in the Pentax system....with which I am quite happy btw. I do not need machine gun fps and I am more than happy with the AF.

I have shot alongside people with 5d's and D300's etc and I am yet to see anything that makes me say..'gee, gotta have that'.. in fact quite the opposite applies.

So why not the K10D? Simple, The K20D is newer technology, it expands on the K10D , so why wouldn't you buy it?

Current Price is largely irrelevant as they were both priced very much the same on release. Price movement will happen over time and the K20D has already moved down a bit, which makes it sensational value for what you get. (& no I don't work for Pentax).

Cheers.

[Lance B]

If you are coming from the K10D and have only just paid around the $1,000 mark for it within the last 12 months, then I can see that you find that spending *another* $1,200 on a K20D in such a short time could be deemed as extravagant and therefore you cannot see the value.

If you are new to DSLR, coming from a P&S camera, coming from another brand or are upgrading from a Pentax 6Mp camera from a few years back(or even more recently) then I would say that the K20D is fabulous value and definitely worthy of the upgrade and price.

This is a judgement *only* you can make and therefore you shouldn't impose your belief's onto others as yours was the only correct one. The K20D is *much* better than people give it credit for if you purely look at the specs.

1) The resolution difference is quite amazing and top quality lenses really benefit from this amazing sensor. Also, the extra resolution seems to be so high that the images start to look almost medium format in their quality. This has to do with the apparent less DOF on offer with the higher resolution.

2) The AF adjustment feature is brilliant for fine tuning your lenses for focus. Now *every* one of my shots are perfect for focus.

3) The high ISO noise is about 2 stops better. I now will shoot at ISO1600 whereas I wouldn't go over ISO400 with the K10D

4) General AF fucntion seems tweaked.

5) SR is tweaked

6) Extra user functions.

It is quite easy to dismiss the K20D's extra features and benefits, but until you *live* with it, you really don't know what you are missing.

As for your criticisms:

[COLOR="Blue"]-Live view? It's been discussed. Some will use it, others will not. Some say they will use it, but never will.[COLOR]

I would only really ever use live view for macro on a tripod and for this it works perfectly. As I always use manual focus for macro, live view and manual focus works *perfectly*.

-PC sync socket? A hot shoe adapter costs $20 or less.

Don't use it, but it maybe good for some people. We are not all like *you*.

-Dust alert system? Tiny improvement.

Don't use it, but it maybe good for some people. We are not all like *you*

-Expanded Dynamic Range? Okay, this may come in handy for picky photographers or portraitists, but for the majority of us, there's Photoshop, GIMP, Aperture, Corel, etc.

It is good for jpeg users and can be of assistance in evaluating a scene even in RAW.

-Custom image functions? This may just be my opinion, but whoop dee doo! Again, IMHO this is just for a picky photographer that doesn't want to post-process his/her pictures.

Some of these custom functions are very useful to many users. Like setting up the front and rear dials to suit your requirments, but there are many more and too many to mention here.

If this isn't for you, then fine, but others may find the custom functions a great feature. If you do not find this is a good feature, then fine, but we are not all like *you*.

Still sync speed is 180.

I do not find this a limitation. If you do, then that is fine, but we are not all like *you*

-2.7-inch LCD. Almost all the others are 3"

A larger LCD screen would be good, but then the camera may have had to be bigger too. I would rather a more resolution screen than a bigger screen.

-Shake reduction system still anything but extraordinary.

And how did you quantify this? I can easily hand hold to 4 stops depending on focal lenght, so how do you say that this is not extraordinary? SR works with *every* lens that I own without the added cost of upgrading lenses. I thikn that is *very* extraordinary.

-AND still only 3 FPS

I have never found that 3fps is a limitation on any of the subject matter I use the camera for and I have used the K10D/K20D for windsurfers travelling at a fair clip and have *never* found it wanting in this department.

Unfortunately, your belief of what is a required in a camera and other people's belief of what is required is obviously different and therefore we are not all like *you*. The same can be said of any camera brand or model, but the difference is, we are not complaining about the other brands or models and can appreciate that others may find them attractive for their purposes.

I'm not ready to jump yet, I am still learning to use my K10D. If I do buy a K20D (or whatever comes next) it will be because the price is right and so that I have a second body to grow into. I do have some opinions however.
10 MP to 14.6MP is a big leap forward.
New sensor is a big change.
No improvement in FPS may be a problem to some people but I bet they are in the minority. (OP if you really need more than 3FPS, then you are just going to have to get one of those other cameras you mentioned but I bet there will be things about that you don't like as well).
No company in there right mind is going to do everything in one step, it would be financial suicide. Profits from K10D would have gone in to R&D for the K20D, profits from K20D will probably go in to the next camera that Pentax releases.
I'm not that technically minded but maybe there will be firmware to up the FPS rate.
Gary

[Lance B]

I'm not ready to jump yet, I am still learning to use my K10D. If I do buy a K20D (or whatever comes next) it will be because the price is right and so that I have a second body to grow into. I do have some opinions however.
10 MP to 14.6MP is a big leap forward.
New sensor is a big change.
No improvement in FPS may be a problem to some people but I bet they are in the minority. (OP if you really need more than 3FPS, then you are just going to have to get one of those other cameras you mentioned but I bet there will be things about that you don't like as well).
No company in there right mind is going to do everything in one step, it would be financial suicide. Profits from K10D would have gone in to R&D for the K20D, profits from K20D will probably go in to the next camera that Pentax releases.
I'm not that technically minded but maybe there will be firmware to up the FPS rate.
Gary

Good points, Gary.

I doubt that there will be a firmware upgrade for the FPS as the FPS is a function of the limitations of the shutter and mirror mechanism. To get higher FPS, Pentax need a more robust shutter/mirror assembly and this would have proved too costly to implement in the K20D for the points you made out in your post.

The new KxxD will possibly have better FPS and also possibly faster low light AF.

[creampuff]

The K10D was a fine camera but not perfect.
Focusing issues with some lenses is one, and Pentax users who may have the problem but are unaware of it can't seem to figure out why their pictures lack that "snap."

At the heart of a digital camera is the sensor, and the K20D sensor is stunning. The K20D is much improved in so many areas compared to the K10D. The improvement do warrant the price difference between the two cameras.

You may think that the Sony A-700 and the Nikon D300 are so much better specs wise. Well the reality is specifications alone don't tell the whole story.

Sony A-700 owners have been plagued by their cameras hanging/freezing, requiring a hard reset. Or how about Nikon D300s that AF intermittently or won't AF at all, or for that matter the pretty poor battery performance. The 40D may have a bigger LCD but it is so-so resolution wise and Live View implementation is nothing to shout about.

Thankfully the K20D to my knowledge is pretty problem free and that to me is an important consideration, just like some features like the intervalometer or the AF adjustment.

[falconeye]

it's not that big of an upgrade from the K10D. Good luck against 40D, D300, and A-700.

I personally rank those D300, K20D (best IQ), 40D, A700. All four are great. But that's not the point.

The K20D is a great 2008 camera, just like the K10D is a great 2006/2007 camera. Either camera is good for 4 years of fun, at least. Except if you suffer from CBA or earn your money with it, keep your dollar and spend it on a forthcoming K40D.

However, if you suffer from CBA, it won't help to mock up reasons against getting the next one. It won't work. This is like saying after having smoked one cigarette: "the next one tastes too bad to be worth it". It won't work.

[flyer]

If you try the K20D with an outstanding lens (read 31 LTD or 77LTD),you will understand what GREATNESS is. If you are in the publishing business, it is a lot easier to make a 2 pages spread out of 14.6 meg. than from 10.2 meg. I can often shoot at ISO 3200 and get shots I would miss with my K10D. I also enjoy the "tweaks" when going for a relaxed shoot with no headache JPEG for fast output to please family and friends. Those might not apply for you, but we are not you!

[regken]

As a K10D owner I can understand where you are coming from. If you are not in "need" of the better resolution it comes down to how much you are willing to pay for the improvements the K20D offers. The difference is around $600-$700. That's more than I'm willing to pay but doesn't mean it's not worth it to others.

When, if, that difference reaches $350 I'll upgrade. In the meantime I'll spend my hobby dollars elsewhere, and have. I have 5 primes that should shine on the K20D and am looking forward to that.

Ken