Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-25-2007, 10:00 AM   #91
Veteran Member
-=JoN=-'s Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,000
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
I beg to differ. The quality of the K10D at 800 iso is the same as 200 iso negative Kodak Gold film grain. In fact in scanning Provia 100 iso, the grain was more dominant when scanned at 3200 pixels than that of the K10D at 640 iso. I only gave up film about three years ago and gave up shooting 35 mm for many reasons, one of which was grain, resolution and economy.
i really didnt want to get into specifics, more than just a general example.
I recently got some rolls developed, mostly ISO 400, and yes the grain was more noticeable on that than the ISO 400 on the k10d

good thing to point out

02-25-2007, 03:16 PM   #92
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lone Tree, Colorado, USA
Posts: 77
NaClH2O-

You said:
"It's also easier to protect a lens from weather with plastic bag and still be able to use the lens thru the bag. Not as easy as using it w/o the bag, but it can be done. Much more difficult to operate a camera that way."

What is it exactly that you do when out shooting in the rain? How do you set up the plastic bag?
02-25-2007, 03:27 PM   #93
Senior Member
Zubati Kit's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 114
QuoteOriginally posted by WMBP Quote
I've been unclear about ISO in digital cameras for a long time. Why doesn't the K100D have an ISO 100 setting, for example?

And would the K10D and K100D be equally/identically sensitive at the same ISO, other things being equal? In other words, if you put both cameras in the same place and took a controlled picture, if ISO 200, f/11, 1/400s was the perfect exposure for one camera, would it be perfect for the other?

Will
in my understanding yes,

meaning ISO 200 on K10D and K100D should give the picture exposed in the same way... now I think it is a known fact that different manufacturers set it differently (I think that for 400Xti ISO 100 is more like 150) but in principle it should follow the same standard.

as for K100D starting at ISO 200 - that was the design of the sensor by Sony.
02-25-2007, 05:49 PM   #94
Veteran Member
WMBP's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,496
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Zubati Kit Quote
meaning ISO 200 on K10D and K100D should give the picture exposed in the same way... now I think it is a known fact that different manufacturers set it differently (I think that for 400Xti ISO 100 is more like 150) but in principle it should follow the same standard.
Yes, I understand in principle. But there seems to be a very large range of differences between the ISO sensitivity of different cameras even from the same manufacturer. There's certainly an enormous difference in the noise levels at different ISOs.


QuoteQuote:
as for K100D starting at ISO 200 - that was the design of the sensor by Sony.
I thought the K10D had the same sensor as the K100D.

I heard someone explain somewhere that for most sensors, there's a slowest speed where there's no discernible noise, and there's no point in going below that speed. For the K100D, that speed would seem to be 200 ISO. Even if you had a 100 ISO, there'd be no reason to use it..

Will

02-25-2007, 06:02 PM   #95
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,312
In print a differnt story

QuoteOriginally posted by -=JoN=- Quote
i really didnt want to get into specifics, more than just a general example.
I recently got some rolls developed, mostly ISO 400, and yes the grain was more noticeable on that than the ISO 400 on the k10d

good thing to point out
I used to use 35-mm film for some of my jobs. We are talking Provia 100iso Slide Film. Now these posters were for a large chain of clothing stores in France and Belgium called Camaieu. The grain showing on these posters was excessive to say the least. It was an effect of sorts. They were scanned on a rotary pro scanner and beyond a certain point all that was being scanned was the grain. Contrary to what someone said on DP Reviews regarding claims that "some photographers claim that they have printed posters from 8 mega pixel cameras are....blah blah blah." Well the fact of the matter is this. My images were printed on 3x5 meter posters from a Canon 10D and I did the interpolation in PS. They were excellent. The grain of the images that were shot at 400 iso were that of 100 iso medium format negative film or that of 400 iso slide film. At 100 iso in "Chasseur des Images" magazine, the K10D had the least grain of all the camera's featured including the Nikon D80 which had the same grain structure at 100 iso than that of the K10D at 200 iso. There is for all intent and purpose no grain at 100 iso to speak of. The only grain in a published work is that of the tram which is the limitation of the support.

Last edited by benjikan; 03-17-2007 at 03:05 AM.
02-25-2007, 11:37 PM   #96
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 296
.....And, just to add a bit more confusion to the issue - ISO/ASA values on film varied quite considerably with manufacturer, film type, batch, quality of processing and - most importantly with professional films - just how well and for how long the film was stored. Even ambient temperatures needed to be considered when shooting outside of controlled environments.
Color fidelity was even less predictable!
So, back to your 'all singing, all dancing' modern digital miracle boxes with your complete processing (darkroom-in-a-box) in-computor facilities and think kindly on the pioneers who ported complete wet-plate outfits (darkroom-in-a-b****y-great-marquee) to some of the most remote parts of the planet and returned home (well, usually, - some didn't make it) with images that many of us would have been proud to have created just yesterday.
Just my 2-bob's worth!
02-26-2007, 08:57 AM   #97
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 643
"So, back to your 'all singing, all dancing' modern digital miracle boxes"

and we still aint happy with em are we.. ???

"should I upgrade to K10D?".. to go back to the original question.. yes if u feel the "need".. just dont expect to get "unbiased" rational justification for your in essence irrational "needs" thow.. he he he

kinda sad really but a camera u had for ten years and mastered to its and your own best abilities over that ten year period no longer exists.. now u get better results at any given skill level simply by obtaining the "latest" miracle in a box.. yesterdays miracle in a box will never ever be good enough again..

i already have a shelf full of "yesterdays miracles"..

trog
02-26-2007, 09:59 AM   #98
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 174
K10D besides image quality:

- much better fit in my hands
- better LCD
- better viewfinder
- more flexible control options
- more confidence that it is a better designed and build machine

Although you are accustomed to K100 feel in your hand, I found I could never have owned any of the other digital Pentax SLRs just based on design of body (feel in my hands), viewfinder, etc. However, K10d is a very large step above the others in body design, feel, viewfinder, shutter sound, etc.

I will not get into the more subtle image quality issues because this is based on how you will print, etc.

02-27-2007, 02:26 PM   #99
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,312
"The Print"

QuoteOriginally posted by Photomy Quote
K10D besides image quality:

- much better fit in my hands
- better LCD
- better viewfinder
- more flexible control options
- more confidence that it is a better designed and build machine

Although you are accustomed to K100 feel in your hand, I found I could never have owned any of the other digital Pentax SLRs just based on design of body (feel in my hands), viewfinder, etc. However, K10d is a very large step above the others in body design, feel, viewfinder, shutter sound, etc.

I will not get into the more subtle image quality issues because this is based on how you will print, etc.
I tend to agree with the above statement by Photomy. I suggest you do an A3+ print and see the differences in detail. I think you'll be quite impressed with the capacity of the K10D's ability to pick up nuances that the K100 cannot. The K10D has a dual 22 bit processor that the results of which become apparent on larger sized reproductions.

Last edited by benjikan; 02-27-2007 at 03:51 PM.
02-27-2007, 03:07 PM   #100
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 643
i would tend to agree with your last comment ben.. but is that justification for moving from a k100 to a k10.. to some it might be but to me it isnt..

pixel peeping for minutia is a fools game.. i was reading some canon comment on the new tarmon 18 x 250 do everything lens..

some even said one of those on a pentax k100 or k10 with their in body SR might even make an impressive tool..

i think it would make for more of an impressive tool on a k100 than on a k10.. then again at higher iso levels the extra k10 detail might not actually be there..

i think my k100 and my tamron 18 x 200 teamed up with my sigma 70 x 300.. makes an unbeatable combination.. at least unbeatable by anything not costing thousands more..

what isnt that usable on other cameras becomes very usable on my k100.. a k100 with a new tamron 18 x 250 for less than a thousand dollars would be/is a winning combination..

but its horses for courses and everything is a trade off..

but window shopping and real shopping tend to go together on the internet money doesnt quite figure into whats best perhaps as much as it should..

trog
02-27-2007, 03:25 PM   #101
Veteran Member
WMBP's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,496
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by trog100 Quote
but window shopping and real shopping tend to go together on the internet money doesnt quite figure into whats best perhaps as much as it should.


I have learned a great deal from this thread - about what's great about the K100D, and about what I'm missing (or not missing very much, as the case may be) in the K10D. I like to know this kind of stuff and do not regard it as idle knowledge. I'm grateful to everybody for sharing their thoughts with me.

But for the record, money certainly DOES matter to me. It is money only that's kept me from buying the K10D. If we win the lottery, I'm buying one right after I help my wife buy the Airstream trailer she's been dreaming about. Now, as the odds on winning the lottery are pretty long, I suspect it will be a K100D that I take to the Rocky Mountains in July. Perhaps by the time we hike again down into the Grand Canyon in the fall I'll have a new camera. Hard to think of a better excuse for a new camera than the Grand Canyon. But for now, I'm going to stick with the K100D. I can't say yet that it's stunting my growth as an artist. :-)

Will
02-27-2007, 03:59 PM   #102
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 643
the odds are a lot greater for me Will as regards winning the lottery..

in the ten or more years the UK has had its "lottery" i can honestly say i have never bought one f-cking ticket.. i am pretty unique in this respect.. i know of no other.. he he

what this says about my charactor i am b-ggered if i know..

trog
02-27-2007, 05:12 PM   #103
Veteran Member
jfdavis58's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 876
You're a very 'linear' thinker, right? Sorry I'm not.

You have 3 or 4 lenses- I've got 9 in my main bag, 20-30 others worthy of special projects and who know how many experiments. Once you get a camera that satisfies most of your requirements, LBA as it's known here, begins to set in. If I recall you have at least 2 lenses that overlap focal lengths on one end or another--expect that to get worse. But that would be a typical user response--perhaps you're not typical as I thought.


The big 'problem' with Pentax's new lens offerings is the lack of an aperature ring--that makes them forward looking only. Well almost, they might fit the cameras between the *ist-D and the K10D but they don't do film and that won't work without a body to control the aperture. That's questionable to me as I expects three basic controls: speed, aperture, shutter; regardless of what the rest of the features might offer.

Digital=electronic=dust: simple relationship with no completely adequate in-camera solution. You will reach a point where you need dust removal. Arctic Butterfly is the (my opinion) best start point.


Finally: what is in you Will? Are you more or less creative than your current equipment? Does it do all you want or anticipate doing? If so, say with it. The K10d is the pinnacle of current Pentax development/production. It has all the features you are likely to find on any similar offering from any company. Do your needs and abilities extend as far as it's capabilities--I would hope they go further. But you know you better than I know you. You know what you want/need.
02-27-2007, 09:11 PM   #104
Veteran Member
WMBP's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,496
Original Poster
bottom line?

Someone wrote me privately to ask, if I could start over - say I owned neither camera and was going to buy now, but knowing what I know now - would I buy the K100D or the K10D? It's a fair question, but I want to give a fair answer - fair both to the cameras themselves and also to anybody who may be trying to decide.

I hasten to add that the following ramble is addressed to folks who are on the fence. It's NOT addressed to the experienced folks who've already made their purchases. In fact, you folks should stop reading. The following will bore you or anger you. I'm not talking to you. I'm talking to those who are still shopping. I'm absolutely NOT going to tell anybody what to do. As I've demonstrated in this thread, I can't even decide for myself very well, so I'm not going to presume to decide for anybody else. But since the question was asked, I did want to try to provide some sort of answer.

Back in the fall of 2006 when I was still doing the shopping that led me to buy the K100D, I figured I could get into the game with the K100D for about $600 (not counting whatever I got back from the sale of my old camera) plus another $300 or so for a lens or two. If only! I did not consider the K10D at all.

I know a lot more than I did then. If I had it all to do again, if I could find a way to afford the K10D AND still have money left for lenses, that's what I would do. Not everybody here agrees, but I'm personally persuaded that the K10D is a better camera than the K100D, not perhaps in every single respect, but overall, so the only reason not to get it - at least the only reason I personally find compelling - is the money. It's all about the money.

And what should YOU do? I certainly don't know, but I do think that you should consider a couple things.

The decision should be easy for two kinds of people: people who don't care much about the money, and people who don't care THAT much about the camera. If you're a hobbyist who just wants to have a really good DSLR to grow as a photographer with, but you're not obsessive-compulsive like some of us, then God bless you - get yourself a K100D, you'll love it. By the same token, if you are lucky enough to be able to spend $900 - $1000 without agonizing, and if you're aware already that there is a good likelihood that you will want to spend even more money - maybe a little, maybe a lot - on another lens or two or three, flash accessory, etc., then heck yes, go for the K10D.

But what if like me, you really like to push your budget to the limits and feel that doing so is not irresponsible, in other words, if you have to gulp hard to spend $1000 but you still feel the urge to do so, well, I sympathize. I know it's not much help, but I can offer this comforting thought: the photographer matters more than the camera. Unfortunately, I do not believe that the camera doesn't matter at all. But when you're comparing the K100D and the K10D, you're not comparing crap with gold. You're comparing an 18 karat gold ring with another 18 karat gold ring that has a small diamond inset. The K10D may be able to take better photos than the K100D, but only in the hands of somebody who's capable of taking good photos with the K100D, too.If you'd be an indifferent photographer with the K100D, you're going to be an indifferent photographer with the K10D, too, but with less money in the bank.

And don't forget that the camera itself is only half of the problem, or less than half. You may be different. You might be able to get by forever with the K10D and the kit lens. After all, as far as I can tell, it's more camera than Henri Cartier-Bresson ever owned. If you really are that disciplined - or you know your needs as a photographer that well and they're fully met by the K10D kit - then get the K10D kit. But I think most enthusiasts should expect to spend AT LEAST as much again on one or more lenses as they spent on the camera in the first place. And at least at the moment you depress the shutter button, the lens has more impact on the technical quality of your photos than the body of the camera. A K100D with a great lens may be able to take great photos. A K10D with a lousy cheap lens will take lousy photos - at least technically lousy - even if the photographer is a master.

And what I am doing, finally? I've announced here at least twice that I'm sticking with the K100D. But I reserve the right to change my mind. :-)

Will
02-27-2007, 09:24 PM   #105
Senior Member
MikeH's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Photos: Albums
Posts: 273
Congratulations. It's a tough decision, sometimes. It's often irrational, too. I had a similar issue in October. The K10D was coming out, and I had my *ist DS. I'd only had the DS for a year, but I really *wanted* the K10D. I wasn't even tempted by the K100D. It didn't have the viewfinder of the DS. Sure it had SR, but the K10D was what I wanted. I knew that as soon as I handled the camera, i would buy it. Sure enough.

I'm very happy, however. Happy enough that if a K1D was released in the next year, I wouldn't consider it.
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!
advantages, camera, dng, dslr, files, k100d, k10d, lenses, matter, pef, photography, shoot, viewfinder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K10D/K20D to K-7 upgrade? .a.t. Pentax DSLR Discussion 30 08-22-2011 10:59 AM
Cannot upgrade firmware on K10D Jeanimal Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 07-03-2010 09:29 AM
K10d - still a viable upgrade? bychan Pentax DSLR Discussion 8 12-15-2009 05:04 PM
Upgrade from K10D vin Pentax DSLR Discussion 10 12-11-2009 03:19 PM
upgrade from k10d for iso control daverowe Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 12-11-2009 10:14 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:00 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