Originally posted by Andreas A K10D or K200D are good choices too, but they seem to do less well at higher sensitivities.
Once you scale the output to the same size, the per-pixel noise advantage of the K100D goes away.
Select "SNR 18%" and "Print" in this
K10D, K200D, K100D comparison. I had to pick the Nikon D40 instead of the K100D because the latter is not available but both use the same SONY sensor so that results should be pretty much the same.
If you read the dxomark explanations, you'll notice that the standard "Screen" results are per-pixel. The results for "Print" are normalised to the same output size. The per-pixel performance of the K10D/K200D isn't as good as the K100D's but they make up for it with more pixels, which -- when downscaled to the K100D's 6MP -- have almost the same noise. Hence, image noise is practically the same for all three cameras.
Originally posted by Denise I just got the K100D ,,,does not look like the super is worth it
I agree with respect to the dust reduction.
However, the "super" model supports SDM lenses (i.e., lenses with a built-in focus motor) whereas the K100D does not (uses in-body screw drive only). Not a big deal at all unless you start craving for SDM only lenses (of which are pretty few around, most support screw-drive or both).
On the flip side, the K100D still allows
AF focus adjustment via a key sequence whereas the K100D super needs a special software.