Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas 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
|