Originally posted by lesmore49 I'm thinking about getting a Pentax KM and the 18-55 lens, I would use it as a general carry around camera for every day use. I would also use it as a second body for my K10D.
What is the good....the bad....about this camera. Thanks.
Here are a few.
Pentax K2000: First Look - - PopPhotoOctober 2008
"Overall, the K2000 stacks up strongly against its competitors. We find the menubased control system more intuitive than some others -- just one of the details that makes Pentax a favorite among savvy photographers who watch what they spend. The K2000 should help Pentax hold onto its stellar reputation."
Digital Camera Reviews, Ratings of Digital Cameras & Comparisons of Popular DSLR Cameras - DigitalCameraInfo.com... ...y-Blog-Reviews-Pentax-K2000-19582.htm
“... the K-m continues the recent Pentax tradition of producing well-thought out DSLRs that offer great image quality."
Digital Camera Reviews, Ratings of Digital Cameras & Comparisons of Popular DSLR Cameras - DigitalCameraInfo.com... ...y-Blog-Reviews-Pentax-K2000-19582.htm
"The Pentax K2000 might just be the ideal digital SLR for 2009. If you're looking for a small, affordable, full-featured camera that is capable of producing fantastic images, then the K2000 seems like a good choice."
Pentax K-m Review - PhotographyBLOG
"...however, the Pentax K-m certainly hits the mark in terms of features, performance and most importantly image quality. The only major difference between the K-m and K200D is that the latter offers better low-light performance, with intrusive amounts of noise appearing at ISO 1600 rather than 800 on the K-m. In all other respects the 10 megapixel images from the cameras are very similar, with very little purple-fringing, accurate colours and a useful built-in flash and Bulb exposure mode, all delivered with the minimum of user input and effort."
Head to Head: Nikon D60 vs. Pentax K2000 at
Head to Head: Nikon D60 vs. Pentax K2000
The Pentax shot is silky smooth, with great colors but more restrained contrast. Conversely, Nikon bumps the contrast right off the bat, and while transitions at both the highlight and shadow ends of the spectrum aren't as smooth, the D60's shot is definitely punchier out of the gate.
"On detail capture, it's again a pretty close race. To my eye, Pentax has finally figured out their processing when shooting JPEGs: gone are the days of watery, soft straight-from-camera JPEGs that earned Pentax a bad name among pixel peepers. In general, though, Nikon's excellent kit lens and slightly more aggressive sharpening give the D60 the edge when it comes to the amount of detail being resolved. But Pentax's kit lens, while not as nicely built or as universally strong, optically, as the Nikon 18-55mm, is no slouch either. At middle distances and relatively narrow apertures, in fact, it's impressively sharp as well.
Not surprisingly, there's a similar building of noise and grain in both cameras as sensitivity increases. But again, differences in processing yield some slightly different results in spite of the shared sensor, and in this case I think Pentax takes the honors with its more aggressive (and adjustable, if you'd like it less so) noise reduction. While the D60's showing more detail in textured areas at ISO 3200, this comes at the expense of more grain and noise than the super-smooth Pentax."
_______
In the end, it's the quality and inspirational energy of the photo that counts, and what gets in my way of trying to take it. Every so often I might just succeed. Luck seems to play a strange role in this. The Pentax K-m, it should be noted, does not get in my way. But reviews which display unconscious bias, do.