[Earlybird]

I've been reading this forum for quite a while with due diligence and still have not found any convincing arguments as to whether I should upgrade from my K100D to the new K2000 (KM). I use my K100D quite a lot for family pictures, tennis sport shots, and some landscape. I find the Pentax JPEG picture quality to be very good, especially in terms of dynamic range, detail, etc, and the high iso is very decent. I have great shots of my son playing tennis that is quite detailed. My lens lineup includes Tamron 28-75mm , Pentax 21mm, Tamron 70-300mm and the IQ of my pictures clearly outshines the only other camera I can compare it to (Canon G9).

However, I do find the K100D heavy and the AF is slow indoors. While the focus is slow, most of my shots are in focus. I frequently use difference focus points on the K100D. I am eager to switch to a smaller body for travelling purposes. I know the Pentax K2000 has faster AF--may be due to fewer focus points, but am not sure of its focus accuracy. I wonder whether the K2000 will be enough of an upgrade if I only shoot JPEGs.

[RiceHigh]

Wow, you spent a full two hours with it, I’m impressed ;-)

Well, at several different shops - so that I could test different units at different environments with different batteries! I picked one set of lithium AA and one set of Eneloop with myself too.

OK, so the cable remote is missing. It will affect how many % of users? Myself I almost never used it on the K10D/K20D. I know, I know it’s more convenient for fireworks and very long exposures. If they could allow the IR remote to lock the shutter, it would be a very nice workaround.

IR remote is another thing for another purpose. I am kind of person who would never buy a SLR without an remote switch. In fact, I have all types of cable switch for any Pentax SLR/DSLR! From the Cable Switch F, CS-105 (for MZ-S) and a Canon RS-60E3 (for all *ist and K cameras). And in Canon land, I have the RS-60E3 (for lower grade Canon DSLRs) and the RS-80N3 (for 5D and 1 series).

In the old days with mechanical SLRs, I had my mechanical remote shutter release.

In fact, such a remote/cable release is the basic for a SLR for night photography and as you have said, it is a must for fireworks photog.

So I had some luck with the kit lens. Strangely my brother-in-law is lucky too with his kit. I don’t question the possibility of sample variation but it’s true for any lens, even DA* and L lenses as you know. I’d also like to see the real world difference between hood and no-hood on the kit lens. I tried some shots directly with the sun on the side and it seemed to not be that much affected. The DA* 16-50 with its big chunk of glass and a big hood doesn’t perform as good IMO.

If the sun or bright light source comes into the frame, it won't help much. But for many other circumstances, the lens hood's shading and protection is just a big help!

The newer functions you talk about are all related to Liveview. You know very well that none of the camera using the Sony 10.2MP CCD (K10D, A100, A200, D40x, D60, D80, D200, K200D, K-m/K2000) have this function. The only exception is the Sony A300 but I’d guess it’s a special version of the sensor they didn’t allow Nikon or Pentax to use.

But the problem is that when everyone except Pentax have it, Pentax is being rather outdated and they lose the market!

And, with LiveView, there are many possibility for new features, including the movie recording function. Without LiveView, Pentax could do nothing.

Funny, you make a big deal of the lack of remote cable port but my list is no big deal for you. For me the lack of TAv, second dial and selectable AF points are much more annoying.

There are just all "no big deal" to me.

TAv is not any standard and basic exposure mode and choosing an ISO speed is easy and the first thing to do each time I turn on my DSLR. And, I don't hope the ISO to change largely which in case of the TAv mode is.

Second dial adds some convenience but again no big deal. In fact, Canon's rear quick dial is designed in a cyclic turning operation which can be operated much faster than the rear dial of the Pentax (I used and owned them all which I could tell the differences easily).

The 5-point and 11-point AF of K-m and other Pentax DSLRs don't bug me anyway neither as 99% of the time I chose and used the central AF point only. The AF speed, low light performance, AF accuracy and continuous tracking ability are instead important things to me.

[RiceHigh]

I've been reading this forum for quite a while with due diligence and still have not found any convincing arguments as to whether I should upgrade from my K100D to the new K2000 (KM). I use my K100D quite a lot for family pictures, tennis sport shots, and some landscape. I find the Pentax JPEG picture quality to be very good, especially in terms of dynamic range, detail, etc, and the high iso is very decent. I have great shots of my son playing tennis that is quite detailed. My lens lineup includes Tamron 28-75mm , Pentax 21mm, Tamron 70-300mm and the IQ of my pictures clearly outshines the only other camera I can compare it to (Canon G9).

I am afraid that the K100D is the best DSLR ever made by Pentax as long as the Jpeg engine's per pixel sharpness is concerned. The K-m isn't as good in this department. Be prepared to shoot RAW if using the K-m to get most details out of the camera.

However, I do find the K100D heavy and the AF is slow indoors.

The K-m is smaller but not lighter.

While the focus is slow, most of my shots are in focus. I frequently use difference focus points on the K100D. I am eager to switch to a smaller body for travelling purposes. I know the Pentax K2000 has faster AF--may be due to fewer focus points, but am not sure of its focus accuracy.

The low light AF of K-m has less hunting. I believe the AF accuracy is similar and still with significant front focusing for fast primes under tungsten - an unique problem with Pentax *D*SLRs.

I wonder whether the K2000 will be enough of an upgrade if I only shoot JPEGs.

Possibly not. Wait for the new DSLR in summer if you can wait.

[ManuH]

However, I do find the K100D heavy and the AF is slow indoors. While the focus is slow, most of my shots are in focus. I frequently use difference focus points on the K100D. I am eager to switch to a smaller body for travelling purposes. I know the Pentax K2000 has faster AF--may be due to fewer focus points, but am not sure of its focus accuracy. I wonder whether the K2000 will be enough of an upgrade if I only shoot JPEGs.

I shoot tennis too (I played to a relatively good club level not so long ago) and depending on how you shoot it can be difficult or easy. I did a shooting indoor with a 50-135/2.8 and FA77/1.8 and the level of lights were at 1/250, f/2.8, ISO3200 to give you an idea. Even with these slow AF lenses I managed to get a lot of good shots and too much OOF. This was with the K20D, center AF, in AF-C. I have not tried yet with the K-m.

Focus accuracy on the K-m is very good, no worries here. And for speed it's probably better than the K100D. Speed of operation should also be better as is the battery life. It's a good little cam. I suggest you to download the manual and read a bit about what to expect. Of course the best would be to try it, there's many things not in spec sheets that can make a camera comfortable to use or not.

[grishazzz]

My 2 cents:

I am not a pro but I have some experience from film days, when I used "Smena 8" and "Zenit" film cameras, so I am familiar with shutter speed and aperture. For a while I was using my friend's Canon XTI and that’s the reason why I did not purchase Canon. Price is not adequate even for a cheap kit lens, which less sharp than Pentax kit lens, not to mention the Canon’s color reproduction! Eeewww….
I’ve bought K-m a week ago, so far all I can say: I really like this camera!!! The focus is adequate and fast enough in my opinion, sometimes it’s hunting for 2-4 seconds but still it’s fast. The viewfinder is clear and bright! Again, maybe for some people it’s not, but for me it’s just fine.
Today I’ve tried using manual lens (Helios 44-M4) and focusing was not a problem! I can focus quickly and precisely even without confirmation sound. And I do use glasses!
The grip/ergonomic – excellent, very comfortable to hold it, use it, carry around. I purchased the double kit version which comes with 18-55mm and 50-200 kit lenses. Both lenses are working properly no front/back focus. Again I am not a pro, but in my opinion these lenses are very good for the beginners like me! Really!!!
Controls are ok if you’ll get used to it. I changed help button to Digital Preview and AF to AE-LOCK. It’s a good choice when using manual lenses, I guess…. Please correct me I am wrong.
Some people are complaining about lack of focus confirmation red dots and lack of DOF preview: Guys, this is an entry level DSLR camera, don’t expect too much, really! In my opinion, this camera is superior camera for the beginner like me!

JPEG quality is not the best one, but if you are using RAW it won’t be a problem.

For 568$ (+26$ shipping/www.beachcamera.com) I’ve got great camera with 2 lenses, which are way better than Canon’s kit lens! I am on a tight budget right now, so the price/quality ratio is the best in this case.

My first attempt at using an old manual russian lens:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/56976-pentax-k2000-helios-44-m-4-a.html

[RiceHigh]

One missing Con that is also quite important: The lack of an orientation sensor. It causes much inconvenience in requiring the users to rotate each vertical image manually. And even worse, such rotation cannot be done at the PC, but just at the camera, for writing the orientation tag in the EXIF.

[simico]

I tried the K-m for 3 times, one unit of my friend, many units at many shops at two different days. Actually, for the third time I tried the K-m, I spent two hours!

So, you have no real experience and are just trolling. Your words have no credit. I wonder why you and your canikon troll friends haven't been banned already...

[Andi Lo]

One missing Con that is also quite important: The lack of an orientation sensor. It causes much inconvenience in requiring the users to rotate each vertical image manually. And even worse, such rotation cannot be done at the PC, but just at the camera, for writing the orientation tag in the EXIF.

If you stick to one program like Lightroom (which I'm guessing most people do), this is only minor inconvenience. It's a nice feature for sure, but I don't think it's really necessary.

[Marc Sabatella]

Funny, you make a big deal of the lack of remote cable port but my list is no big deal for you. For me the lack of TAv, second dial and selectable AF points are much more annoying.

Thing is, *any* missing feature is going to be no big deal to some but a deal breaker to others. FWIW, nothing on either of those lists makes a whit of difference to me, but lack of DOF preview and orientation sensor would keep me from considering one. And I fully realize that both of these are no big deals to others. Life's funny that way. But that's always the case when producing a stripped down version of some product any feature you cut will make it unacceptable to some. Finding the right set of features to cut to get the cost down but still appeal to a large enough number of people - I suspect you'd have better luck playing roulette.

[ManuH]

One missing Con that is also quite important: The lack of an orientation sensor. It causes much inconvenience in requiring the users to rotate each vertical image manually. And even worse, such rotation cannot be done at the PC, but just at the camera, for writing the orientation tag in the EXIF.

Not true, of course you can do it on the PC. The picture is not changed when you change the orientation, you just write a tag with the orientation and a good viewer will rotate the picture accordingly. Some free software like Irfanview can even do a complete jpeg rotation without any loss. It does it with one key press.

This is maybe an annoyance, but I can't see it as a deal breaker. When you sort pictures, tag them with keywords, post-process a little, etc, rotating them is what? 5% of the time you spend on a picture? There are so many ways to make this process very fast on the PC.

OTOH, I use verticals less and less because most of my pictures are to be displayed on computer screens and verticals don't look good most of the time on wide screens.

[ManuH]

Thing is, *any* missing feature is going to be no big deal to some but a deal breaker to others. FWIW, nothing on either of those lists makes a whit of difference to me, but lack of DOF preview and orientation sensor would keep me from considering one.

Marc, you don't have a K20D/K10D so I understand you cannot miss a second dial or the TAv. Once you're used to them it's difficult to go back IMHO. The K200D/K-m class of camera is good but their ergonomics is no match for the K20D.

K-m vs K200D: My opinion using them is that the K200D is more featured and the K-m has only size and the faster AF as pros vs the K200D. But the K-m suits me better because I already have the K20D and I don't use manual lenses (yet).

[Marc Sabatella]

Marc, you don't have a K20D/K10D so I understand you cannot miss a second dial or the TAv. Once you're used to them it's difficult to go back IMHO.

I'd probably feel the same about the second dial, although even with a K20D I am quite sure I'd never use TAv or any mode pother than M. But my point remains - different people will have different opinions on what features are essential, and that's perfectly normal.

But the K-m suits me better because I already have the K20D and I don't use manual lenses (yet).

"Once you're used to them it's difficult to go back" :-)

Conversely, you're right about rotating pictures on a PC - it is possible, and only takes a second or so per image. But that can still add a significant amount of my time when dealing with a few hundred shots. No thanks. It remains on my "must" list, along with DOF preview. Nothing else missing from the K-m/K2000 matters *to me*. Well, I'd miss the weather sealing, but I'd be willing to accept that in exchange for smaller size / lower weight.

Your arguments about how it is possible to get around lack of an orientation sensor are identical to my feeling about the the second dial. It's possible to do without either; we all know that. You personally would find it hard to be without the added convenience of the second dial; I personally would find it harder to be without the added convenience of the sensor. Someone else would find it hard to be without the conveince of focus point selection or a top LCD. No point trying to talk anyone out of their own priorities.

[Parallax]

.........................I wonder why you and your canikon troll friends haven't been banned already...

I think it is because his posts are so ridiculous that they fall in the "comic relief" category.

[gnaztee]

In fact, the lack of hood is one of the major shortcomings of the K-m kit. And, it does hurt sales!

Seriously? This is one of the dumbest assertions I've heard. People buying an entry-level DSLR would reject the K-m because the kit lens doesn't have a lens hood...really?

[Parallax]

Seriously? This is one of the dumbest assertions I've heard. People buying an entry-level DSLR would reject the K-m because the kit lens doesn't have a lens hood...really?

If that's one of the dumbest assertions you've heard then you haven't read very many of RH's posts.