[lesmore49]

It's kind of shocking how little older digital bodies sell for. I still have my K-5 iis, which still has more than enough resolution, excellent low-light performance, a rugged, comfortable body, and it can shoot 7 frames per second. It's only a small step below the current flagship, really. All that, and they sell for a whopping $300 on eBay, or closer to $200 if you're patient.

For my next vacation / road trip, I'm planning on taking the K-5iis out of the closet, putting my FA31 on it, plus a FA77 in the bag, and that's it. I haven't used it in a few years, so it'll be like a new camera all over again. It's still a great camera, I don't have to spend a thing... and I don't have to wait for "the next big thing."

I see the 645D can be had for around $2k now. 40mp medium format CCD, for $2k...

Quite right about the depreciation of older, but excellent camera equipment. I have my old K10D (bought new in 2007), my old Km (bought new in '09) and my old K5 (bought new in '11) and they all work, all are capable of taking wonderful photos.

Partially because of what relatively little money they bring in, I haven't traded them in when I buy a newer camera. They're worth more to me as camera equipment that still works and I still use, even if it's as not as much as I once did. Think I clicked off around 55-60,000 shutter actuation's with my K10D within the first few years and..touch wood...it still works fine.

An extra camera body doesn't take up a whole lot of room and in my K10D's case at 12, going on 13 years old..if it still works well, why get rid of it ? My kids, both 30 something now, aren't interested in having traditional cameras...they like using their cell phone cameras. Maybe my grandson will develop an interest in DSLR photography and if so, he could be the recipient of some of the equipment..or eventually all of it.

I love photography and I'm still using my Pentax S1a, which I bought new in 1968. It's... an oldie, but a goldie.... as rock DJ's used to say on AM radio back when the S1a was new.

[From1980]

I have been aware of the abundant love among Pentax users for the K10D for a few years now. However when I was making my first, and only to date, foray into Pentax digital I found the K20D, the next "flagship" model, available for a small amount more with a lot of very desirable updated features. Sorry guys, although I do understand preferences in image rendering (like my love for original K lenses) the next model apparently solved some inherent problems CCDs have while attempting to keep up with customers' needs. Noise and artifacts in long exposures and higher ISO were reduced with CMOS use were they not? Features like increased resolution and live view were also sufficient to convince me that for little price difference the later model was the one to have. I often discuss the results of two acquaintances who use the K10D and I'm still convinced my choice was the better value, at least for me.

[BigMackCam]

I have been aware of the abundant love among Pentax users for the K10D for a few years now. However when I was making my first, and only to date, foray into Pentax digital I found the K20D, the next "flagship" model, available for a small amount more with a lot of very desirable updated features. Sorry guys, although I do understand preferences in image rendering (like my love for original K lenses) the next model apparently solved some inherent problems CCDs have while attempting to keep up with customers' needs. Noise and artifacts in long exposures and higher ISO were reduced with CMOS use were they not? Features like increased resolution and live view were also sufficient to convince me that for little price difference the later model was the one to have. I often discuss the results of two acquaintances who use the K10D and I'm still convinced my choice was the better value, at least for me.

I've never used a K20D, Dan, so I can't opine knowledgeably. From my reading, it certainly has a number of very welcome improvements such as greater resolution, live view, better higher ISO performance, better SR, pixel mapping etc.

My first Pentax DSLR was the K-7 - sadly long gone, as I sold it to part-fund my next purchase, the K-5 - a wonderful camera that I still own. Next came the K-3, my main "modern" camera. I later added a K-3II when the prices briefly dropped to an irresistible level, and I figured I should own a backup for the K-3. All have been fantastic cameras that I've been entirely satisfied with, and all had / have CMOS sensors.

I bought my first GX-10 (K10D) after reading so many positive opinions, and looking at some of the wonderful photos taken with it... and within a day or two of using it, I'd fallen in love. Aside from the camera's simplicity of operation, there's something about the raw files (I can't quite put my finger on what it is, exactly) that enables me to get results I love with very little effort. Of course, I can get great results with my later CMOS cameras too, but it always seems like more processing is involved, and... I don't know, the files don't feel quite the same to work with. It's curious, and I suppose it could be my imagination - but I'm not convinced that's the case. Whatever, I liked the GX-10 so much that I stocked up on a further two low-shutter-count units, plus (very recently) a mint and barely-used K10D. My K-3 is used far less frequently now

Either way, K10D / K20D... it doesn't really matter. The point is, these are awesome cameras that do everything most photographers actually need. They may not have all the latest bells and whistles, and we might have to bring a little more skill and thought to the table in order to capture the images we want... But that's all part of the fun and challenge of photography

And the K20D, like the K10D, is available NOW from all good used equipment sources

[Rondec]

I know that Mike is having a little much needed humor. The Forum gets pretty dark at times when there is no news for awhile.

I do think it is amazing the level of camera that you can purchase today for the same price as the K10. I think I paid 800 dollars for my K10 and really enjoyed using it, for all of its flaws. But now you could get a new KP for that price (it doesn't have dual card slots, but neither did the K10) and it wouldn't surprise me if in another year or two, used K-1s drop into that price range.

---

Last edited by Rondec; 09-16-2019 at 03:26 AM.

[BigMackCam]

I know that Mike is having a little much needed humor. The Forum gets pretty dark at times when there is no news for awhile.

Rats. I've been rumbled

[ChristianRock]

I had the K20D, I learned basically all the little that I know about photography with that camera. It is capable of very good results and 14.6MP made for some great prints, even cropped.
But I sold it for the K10D and I haven't looked back. The way it renders images is just gorgeous to me. And the extra dynamic range - at least in real world practice - compared to the K20D in terms of getting more details out of shadow areas solved my major gripe with the K20D. 10MP doesn't feel as limiting as I thought it would.
In general, to me the K10D files look just a little bit better, though I have to say that skin tones with the K20D are basically unbeatable.

[amstel78]

I see I was getting ahead of the crowd by buying a K10D a couple months ago.

There are compromises, like dodgy autofocus. I would think it was the lens, but it nails it half the time and miffs it in mystifying ways the rest of the time. Often at focal lengths/apertures where you can't tell until later that everything's just slightly out of focus until you open it up on the computer later. Maybe it's just the unit's age. I'm a big fan of buying used gear, but it's the sort of thing that makes me wish I had bought newer used gear.

It is a bummer that there's no "modern-er" body with that great CCD color.

Could also be that your K10D requires calibration. Mine which I bought new in the box had similar results to what you describe, but I think the hits were mostly due to smaller apertures being used which essentially masked the fact that AF missed. It wasn't until I actually spent some time with a calibration gauge and access to the development menu that I as able to fix the problem. My K10D AF now hits 99% of the time, even when using wide apertures.

If memory serves, my particular K10D required +120 um adjustment to correct its backfocus habit.

[er1kksen]

Could also be that your K10D requires calibration. Mine which I bought new in the box had similar results to what you describe, but I think the hits were mostly due to smaller apertures being used which essentially masked the fact that AF missed. It wasn't until I actually spent some time with a calibration gauge and access to the development menu that I as able to fix the problem. My K10D AF now hits 99% of the time, even when using wide apertures.

If memory serves, my particular K10D required +120 um adjustment to correct its backfocus habit.

For me it's mostly been shooting wide focal lengths at smaller apertures. I am still getting good focus at least 75% of the time, especially with narrower depth of field. I expanded on the issue and my thoughts about it in my last post here and I don't want to take this too far off-topic, though.

[sg_gardiner]

Interesting to come across this thread because I had just taken my retired K10D out along with the K3 this past weekend in a range of lens pairings. It has been a while since using the K10D so it was interesting to reacquaint myself with it and compare it to the K3.

I much prefer the egonomics on the K10D, why did they move the green button from the top plate next to the shutter release down to the back of the camera where it gets lost in the other controls? The camera feels solid and well-built and has aged well.

The K10D UI is great, menus are simple and easy to navigate.

The shutter noise is much louder on the K10D compared to the K3, mirror slap on the latter is well damped.
The K10D images "pop", looking at the K10D images side-by-side with the K3 it is like comparing transparencies with prints (both were set to capture in Adobe DNG RAW). However also like transparencies the highlights blow out on the K10D and the dynamic range is nowhere as good as the K3.

To conclude, the K10D more than holds its own against its more advanced descendant. The 10 megapixel sensor captures plenty of detail and has a pleasing contrast and tonal rendition. It is a very capable "purist" digital SLR, no video, no live view, film-like rendition and limited ISO range (800 is as far as want to push it). A future classic in the making.

[ChristianRock]

Another thing I can't praise enough, is the SR On/Off switch right on the body, without having to navigate through menus (The K20D also has this).

Also, shutter shock is completely nonexistent in either body (K10D or K20D). Take that, modern cameras!

[luftfluss]

I remember when folks upgraded the the K10D from the 6MP bodies, complaining that the 10MP sensor wasn't "special" like the 6MP one.

[BigMackCam]

I remember when folks upgraded the the K10D from the 6MP bodies, complaining that the 10MP sensor wasn't "special" like the 6MP one.

Interesting... I wonder if any of that had to do with focus accuracy? Or, perhaps, post-processing camera profiles and in-camera JPEG processing?

Every one of my GX-10s and my recently-acquired K10D have needed some AF fine adjustment using DEBUG mode (my first GX-10 needed considerable adjustment), and my GX-1L needed it too... but the 10MP sensor is less forgiving of focus inaccuracy when pixel peeping. Of course, when these cameras came out, no-one knew about AF fine adjustment and DEBUG mode, so folks just accepted what they got from their cameras, and I'm certain quite a few must have been putting up with less than ideal results.

As for camera profiles (whether embedded or in software) and JPEG rendering, everyone has their preferences... The K10D / GX-10 doesn't necessarily render in the most neutral or natural way... there's a certain inherent warmth and saturation that many folks love, but some might find less appealing. All adjustable in post, of course... but it's those very characteristics that I really like

[ChristianRock]

I remember when folks upgraded the the K10D from the 6MP bodies, complaining that the 10MP sensor wasn't "special" like the 6MP one.

The 6MP sensor is special. There's a thread about the 6MP cameras and it's thriving The colors that come out of it are, for lack of a better word, surreal.

The 10MP sensor is also special, but it's different.

I really, *really* and I mean really wish Pentax had done a camera like the K-m with the 14MP CCD sensor from the A390/A290 instead of sticking with the 10MP. That sensor is special as well, but quite different.

Yet they all have the "CCD look" as well.

All this talk doesn't mean CMOS sensors aren't good, they are (and they do have a slightly different look for each generation, and a CMOS from Sony sees light/color a bit different from a CMOS from Canon... and Samsung CMOS as well, as I said earlier, had some very interesting color rendering...)

They're all good at this point.

[dbs]

I remember when folks upgraded the the K10D from the 6MP bodies, complaining that the 10MP sensor wasn't "special" like the 6MP one.

Phew thanks Luftfluss I don't feel so bad now ...only having a K100D super.


Dave

[luftfluss]

Interesting... I wonder if any of that had to do with focus accuracy? Or, perhaps, post-processing camera profiles and in-camera JPEG processing?

Every one of my GX-10s and my recently-acquired K10D have needed some AF fine adjustment using DEBUG mode (my first GX-10 needed considerable adjustment), and my GX-1L needed it too... but the 10MP sensor is less forgiving of focus inaccuracy when pixel peeping. Of course, when these cameras came out, no-one knew about AF fine adjustment and DEBUG mode, so folks just accepted what they got from their cameras, and I'm certain quite a few must have been putting up with less than ideal results.

As for camera profiles (whether embedded or in software) and JPEG rendering, everyone has their preferences... The K10D / GX-10 doesn't necessarily render in the most neutral or natural way... there's a certain inherent warmth and saturation that many folks love, but some might find less appealing. All adjustable in post, of course... but it's those very characteristics that I really like

The 6MP sensor is special. There's a thread about the 6MP cameras and it's thriving The colors that come out of it are, for lack of a better word, surreal.

The 10MP sensor is also special, but it's different.

I really, *really* and I mean really wish Pentax had done a camera like the K-m with the 14MP CCD sensor from the A390/A290 instead of sticking with the 10MP. That sensor is special as well, but quite different.

Yet they all have the "CCD look" as well.

All this talk doesn't mean CMOS sensors aren't good, they are (and they do have a slightly different look for each generation, and a CMOS from Sony sees light/color a bit different from a CMOS from Canon... and Samsung CMOS as well, as I said earlier, had some very interesting color rendering...)

They're all good at this point.

I'm not discounting the CCD special sauce believers, I just find nostalgia funny

I bought my K100D back in September 2007 - 12 years ago! - and subsequently a K2000, so I've owned both CCD sensors. I can't really offer a fair opinion about them because I can't decouple my emotions from the K100D... it was at the time a wonder to me.

The vagaries of color was - and still is - beyond my ken. And I'm OK with that.

Edit: I should add that sometimes I use @BigMackCam 's excellent CCD Look for when I want a bit of that CCD cheer in my photos.