Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-24-2007, 04:12 PM   #1
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Islington, London UK
Posts: 206
K100D v K10D

I was just looking at these shots and I like them a lot... just like out of my D50.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/6161-more-random-shots-k100d-kit-lens.html

It seems... every time I see an image I like on here (and on Flickr) it's been taken with a K100D or earlier 6mp Pentax.

I'm looking to buy my own DSLR so I'm obsessing about which one to get... as I do.

I can tell a 6mp from a 10mp fairly easily now. I find the shots from the K10D (oh dear I'm going to lose some friends now..) flat and over contrasty/saturated compared to the life like and almost 3D (in feel) shots from K100D (or my borrowed Nikon D50). I love that look. Maybe it's not 'film like' but I like it.

Such a shame cos I really want the functionality of the K10D!!!... I'm honestly 'gutted' when I see a shot I like and yep... it's done with a ist DS (usually) or K100D. I may buy a K100D/D50 (the nikon has slightly better image quality I think/cheap lenses... but I like idea of SR on the Pentax... hmmm) and wait for 10mp sensor quality to catch up before upgrading to a more 'professional' camera!?

If any of you have both a k100D/D50 (or both ideally) and a k10D could you post a series of comparison shots (same shot/same conditions/settings) from each for me to look at? Challenge me to guess which is which if you like! haha... I'll get it right every time. I'm not talking about high ISO shots either (we've all heard about those differences)... good light portraits/still life etc too... it's just as easy to tell the difference.

Lastly... why don't camera reviewers make it clearer about whether they're referring to jpgs or RAW quality in their reviews!!!!?? Ultimately that's what I'm interested in now I use Lightroom. Surely serious photography magazines should be testing RAW quality primarily anwyay and leave jpeg info to 'What Camera' type magazines?

I don't know but ... maybe it's all in the post production, RAW files are all pretty much the same and it's just that K10D's jpegs are like that or their owners like that look? Who knows...

I need to do some test shots in a shop me thinks! Or does anyone live in London with a K10D and would like to meet up, show me around their camera and do some comparison shots?


Discuss... ;-)

04-24-2007, 05:23 PM   #2
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 167
It's been said before but is worth restating: The K10D gives a "flat" tone/saturation/contrast combo straight from because it is assumed post-processing will be part of the workflow. After all, it is more of a "pro"-grade camera.

The K100D and K110D come with the color boost (or whatever the devil it's called) enabled out of the box. However, it is easy to get the same out-of-the-camera look as the K100D just by tweaking some settings.

If you're shooting RAW this makes absolutely no difference.

I used to own a D50, btw, so I know exactly what you're looking for.

Taken with my K10D and slightly post-processed. I have the standard K10D color settings. (Now that I think about it I think I toned down the saturation in this photo)



And look through my flickr shots (link below) for more K10D pics.
04-24-2007, 05:30 PM   #3
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Sailor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Coastal Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,871
I don't have a K100D, but I do have a 6mp DS2. I've always shot in RAW with both cameras and - when I convert to 8-Bit TIFF for printing - I find that the K10D images are more vibrant and rich - somehow a bit more alive. It's not a step change, but I do see a difference. On a computer monitor I've never been able to tell the difference between the two cameras.

Jer
04-24-2007, 05:33 PM   #4
Veteran Member
arbutusq's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver BC canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 380
I have the K100d and the Nikon D70 (D50's elder brother) I have usedthe D50 fairly extensively so I can comment on it. The D70 (and D50) are faster to operate. Faster startup, image display and general operation.

The viewfinder on K100 is better but not by too much. Ergonomics are about even. K100d has the edge in jpeg image quality, the colors are truer and more natural (in Natural mode) than either of the Nikons. The K100 and D70 are about equal in sharpness and both are sharper than the D50. In RAW of course all the 6 mp cameras are equl.

SR is a killer feature as the Nikon VR lenses are quite expensive.

The image quality of the D40 is slightly better than the k100, but only slightly.

When I go shooting I take my K100d.

04-25-2007, 01:33 AM   #5
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Islington, London UK
Posts: 206
Original Poster
Thanks for those comments guys. I'll take a look at those flickr pages too super jared. Hope there's some portraits there as that's where I like that look the most. I'll try and post some shot's of mine that are good examples of the look I like.

I did wonder if it was a post processing thing... are people not using RAW files right or do they like a flat look I wonder!?... I've only just started using RAW and I have to admit, I'm not sure if I have achieved the quality of the out of camera jpeg with the D50 RAW files yet...

I'm interested in how you achieve that 3D look by adjusting RAW files' sharpening, contrast or whatever it is that's needed in post processing to achieve it ... I don't really understand how that makes lose it's flatness. I presumed it was some fluke/quirk of the D50 that some how made a 3D-image!?

I was also wondering if it's maybe the pentax lenses contrast that I found a bit heavy. Could it be I prefer the look of a cheaper kit lens / Sigma lenses!!???

Thanks again for your help so far!
04-25-2007, 02:23 AM   #6
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Islington, London UK
Posts: 206
Original Poster
also... I thought the D50's look was to do with the way it reproduced dynamic range or something. I should compare RAW and Jpeg shots from the D50 to appreciate the difference I guess... maybe try and emulate a jpeg from a RAW version of the same shot... I might learn something...

I thought it was all some kind of Nikon sorcery.... maybe I'm wrong!
04-25-2007, 10:53 AM   #7
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 167
QuoteOriginally posted by Christian Quote
Thanks for those comments guys. I'll take a look at those flickr pages too super jared. Hope there's some portraits there as that's where I like that look the most. I'll try and post some shot's of mine that are good examples of the look I like.
Here's a portrait taken with the K10D in low light, outside with a 50-200 4-5.6. The color and contrast is pretty darn close to what came from the camera -- it didn't require much PP so hopefully it serves as a good example.



QuoteOriginally posted by Christian Quote
I did wonder if it was a post processing thing... are people not using RAW files right or do they like a flat look I wonder!?... I've only just started using RAW and I have to admit, I'm not sure if I have achieved the quality of the out of camera jpeg with the D50 RAW files yet...
There are many reasons for this. Most people like a different look than you do. For example I like the high-contrast low-saturation look. Some like the opposite. In any case, with PP, you can do this on any camera. Shooting RAW makes it that much easier.

QuoteOriginally posted by Christian Quote
I'm interested in how you achieve that 3D look by adjusting RAW files' sharpening, contrast or whatever it is that's needed in post processing to achieve it ... I don't really understand how that makes lose it's flatness. I presumed it was some fluke/quirk of the D50 that some how made a 3D-image!?
This is 100% subjective! And you'd really have to know exactly what makes it 3D to replicate it. For a while I wasn't sure how to create the look I wanted, which was frustrating, but finally I've gotten it. With enough determination and time you can create photos much higher in quality than what you'd receive in JPG straight from the camera.

QuoteOriginally posted by Christian Quote
I was also wondering if it's maybe the pentax lenses contrast that I found a bit heavy. Could it be I prefer the look of a cheaper kit lens / Sigma lenses!!???
If you don't like the contrast amount in the Pentax lenses you have the ability to reduce the contrast in PP. Whether it's the contrast slider or curves you can nearly always reduce it to how you'd really like it to look.

QuoteOriginally posted by Christian Quote
Thanks again for your help so far!
Of course!

QuoteOriginally posted by Christian Quote
also... I thought the D50's look was to do with the way it reproduced dynamic range or something. I should compare RAW and Jpeg shots from the D50 to appreciate the difference I guess... maybe try and emulate a jpeg from a RAW version of the same shot... I might learn something...

I thought it was all some kind of Nikon sorcery.... maybe I'm wrong!
I find that the K10D has greater dynamic range than my old D50. I find that the D50 "look" is lower-contrast, more saturation. You can acheive the same effect with any camera if tuned or processed correctly.
04-25-2007, 11:13 AM   #8
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Islington, London UK
Posts: 206
Original Poster
Yeah I saw that one... really good. You def know what 'look' I was on about with regards to the Nikon D50s jpegs.

I looked through all your photos.. another one really stood out.. the one with skateboards/office... then I noticed it was taken with the D50!! I'm v confused as to which camera to buy! haha

Luckily I have the use of the D50 in the meantime...

It might just come down to teh smaller size of the K100D to K10D as I like to take my camera every where as much as possible... I'm considering risking Glastonbury Music festival with a DSLR... not sure I'd risk taking the big/expensive k10D along!?

04-25-2007, 11:29 AM   #9
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 167
I just received the K110D today as a gift for my girlfriend. I'll post some default camera JPGs here so you can see what it looks like. I have a feeling the K100D & K110D will be very close to the look of the D50 out of the box.
04-25-2007, 11:35 AM   #10
Veteran Member
WMBP's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,496
QuoteOriginally posted by Christian Quote
It might just come down to teh smaller size of the K100D to K10D as I like to take my camera every where as much as possible... I'm considering risking Glastonbury Music festival with a DSLR... not sure I'd risk taking the big/expensive k10D along!?
Christian,

I owned the K100D before I bought the K10D. Like them both, but, well, let me just say that I do not regret moving to the K10D. It is bigger and heavier than the K100D and I actually like that, but the difference is not huge. It certainly isn't the case that the K10D is a big honkin' camera while the K100D is petite! No normal person glancing in your direction will notice the difference (unless you carry the K10D around with the grip attached, but I assume that's not part of your plan now). I take my K10D with me everywhere, just as I used to take the K100D with me everywhere. In short, while of course you can make your decision on any basis you like, I personally think it would be a mistake to make it mainly on the basis of a difference in size. There are good reasons to pick the K100D, starting with price.

Will
04-25-2007, 01:32 PM   #11
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 167
Here are the photos from the K110D as promised. These pics are straight from the camera -- except resized and saved to quality 10 in Photoshop. Keep in mind these were just at about noon -- the first two are in direct sunlight -- so you'll have considerably more contrast than in softer light. The color vividness is astounding. It's certainly more vivid than I like, then again I've never been a fan of Velvia (blasphemy!).





04-25-2007, 08:45 PM   #12
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 5
I have to agree with you, I was looking for the same look in a D50 or D70 when I went for the K100D. Although I considered the K10, the Flickr shots seemed flat to me as well. I don't do much flash photography, and prefer using natural light only. The larger sensor on the K100D seems to accommodate that.
I prefer non posed portrait such as or . This is my favorite type of photography. This effect seems to look more like film to me and not washed out or contrasty like some flash pics. I was just talking to both of these people (friends of mine) and I shot from the hip while talking. In the second one, he heard the mirror and I captured a real face.

Last edited by mrbach; 04-25-2007 at 08:53 PM. Reason: image link
04-26-2007, 02:33 AM   #13
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Islington, London UK
Posts: 206
Original Poster
thanks to you all for your responses! I'm glad I'm not alone in my obvservation towards the K10D's flat image quality.

I understand about the proximity of the sensor parts causing noise at higher ISO...(which is a shame because I intend to take shots of my friend's band) but still not sure about the reason for flat looking images...

I guess in a way, the sort of photogragher that uses high end DSLRs is more likely to be press/wedding etc and is more concerned with the features/speed/size of image of the camera and will forgo loss in quality. In the same way a DJ will use Technics SL1200 record decks (which don't sound the best but have the features DJs need) and audiophiles will use something else.

Can it be that K10D owners are mostly shooting RAW and messing up post production? Maybe the replication of in-camera jpegs similar to D50/K100 is very hard to do from a RAW file? I do see that contrast can give an image depth but maybe people are making images over contrasty which makes images look flat again?

I do love the features of the K10D though... especially the viewfinder... hmmm

It made me think actually... it's a bit like 35mm/medium format in reverse isn't it... larger film allows for a higher quality capture... but for DSLRs the fewer pixels crammed in the same area the better the image... there's definitely a need for full frame/medium format DSLRs I think! But they're so expesive.

Mind you, you can pick up medium format film cameras pretty cheap now, so maybe at last I can afford to pick one of those up thanks to digital!
04-26-2007, 11:13 AM   #14
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 167
QuoteOriginally posted by Christian Quote
Can it be that K10D owners are mostly shooting RAW and messing up post production? Maybe the replication of in-camera jpegs similar to D50/K100 is very hard to do from a RAW file? I do see that contrast can give an image depth but maybe people are making images over contrasty which makes images look flat again?
I have a feeling most people are shooting JPG with the default camera settings, meaning no punch in color, contrast, sharpness, etc. And again, you can fairly easily replicate the look in the K10D if you were to adjust the color, contrast, sharpness, etc.

The K100D and K110D, like the D50, are consumer-targeted cameras that provide the added 'pop' directly from the camera. That extra 'pop' is a detriment to someone who wants to modify the photo.

It doesn't matter if you choose the K10D or K100D -- you can take about the same quality of photos in each. You must qualify what features and drawbacks are important to you.

Remember, the photographer takes the photos. The camera is just the tool.
04-26-2007, 11:22 AM   #15
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 167
QuoteOriginally posted by Christian Quote
I guess in a way, the sort of photogragher that uses high end DSLRs is more likely to be press/wedding etc and is more concerned with the features/speed/size of image of the camera and will forgo loss in quality. In the same way a DJ will use Technics SL1200 record decks (which don't sound the best but have the features DJs need) and audiophiles will use something else.
Again, you have to choose what features are important to you. The only drawback I can see in choosing the K10D over the others is the noise issue. That's it. The image quality is excellent, color rendition is near perfect, and all the other features blow away the smaller camera.

If you can't get the camera to do what you want you probably shouldn't be blaming the tool.
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!
camera, comparison, dslr, k100d, k10d, magazines, photography, post, quality, shots
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Battery Grip for K100D/K110D/K100D Super Camera, K10D/K20D D-LI50 Battery frank Sold Items 12 05-30-2009 06:10 PM
K100d or K10d? quantum Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 02-25-2008 02:31 AM
K100D vs K10D runjmb Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 08-07-2007 08:51 PM
k10D or k100D james Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 05-12-2007 09:26 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:14 AM. | 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