Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-25-2007, 11:49 PM   #1
Veteran Member
Kguru's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Perth - WestAust
Posts: 602
About the K100D

Hi, a couple of questions please:
(1) Is the 18-55mm kit lens on K100D the exact same Pentax item as that on the K10D?
(2) If same lens then, apart from 6Mp versus 10Mp, are there other hardware factors that restrict the "economy-class" K100D from achieving same photo quality level of the K10D? Thanks.

06-26-2007, 12:02 AM   #2
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Portland, Oregon
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 217
yes the lens is the same

apart from 6mp v.s. 10mp is a big one, because the 10mp pixels are noisier, and the sensitivity is lower, so the K100D goes from 200-3200 where the K10D goes 100-1600

The K10D has a more effective SR algorithm and a new image processing engine with 22bit something.
06-26-2007, 12:21 AM   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Kaunas
Posts: 1,452
QuoteOriginally posted by Kguru Quote
Hi, a couple of questions please:
(1) Is the 18-55mm kit lens on K100D the exact same Pentax item as that on the K10D?
(2) If same lens then, apart from 6Mp versus 10Mp, are there other hardware factors that restrict the "economy-class" K100D from achieving same photo quality level of the K10D? Thanks.
1) DA 18-55mm don't heve special K10D edition It's the same lens on K100D and K10D.

2) In my opinion: no. You can take with K100D pictures as good as with K10D. And in low light K100D pictures are going to be better because of lower noise.

Many have chosen K10D over K100D not because of image quality but because of better controls, ergonomics, speed.
06-26-2007, 12:42 AM   #4
Veteran Member
Kguru's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Perth - WestAust
Posts: 602
Original Poster
--Removed--


Last edited by Kguru; 06-26-2007 at 02:04 AM. Reason: Removed
06-26-2007, 12:45 AM   #5
baw
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Neterlands
Posts: 189
I think with both cameras you'll have a fine machine to take pictures, the K100D being better in high iso, the K10D being better at ergonomics.
I bought the K100D, figuring that in 1 or 2 years time I would be able to buy a K10D at reduced price level. So I'll end up with two cameras for the price the K10D would have cost me now.
In the mean time I'm building my lenscollection, and am getting my raw workflow organised.
06-26-2007, 12:46 AM   #6
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 296
Have a look at benjikan's work.
06-26-2007, 02:02 AM   #7
Veteran Member
Kguru's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Perth - WestAust
Posts: 602
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rolly Quote
Have a look at benjikan's work.
Thanks everyone for your replies; now I'd like to step up a notch on the difficulty scale

Please take a look here (takes 1-2 minutes to show up)
Cameron Diaz (imgs): Olympus SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

especially the last photo which highlights Diaz's skin features. These come from an Oly E-500 with its kit lens and these photos alone almost led me to buying that kit. (Reasons I backed out: camera too bulky for my small hand, no top LCD, poor viewfinder, and I don't like fixed 4:3 aspect ratio).

So I'm still considering a K100D, the burning question is if the same photographer had used a K100D with its kit lens would it have the potential for him to have produced those same detailed photos? Thanks.

PS: Where do I see benjikan's work?

Last edited by Kguru; 06-26-2007 at 03:31 AM.
06-26-2007, 02:29 AM   #8
New Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 22
hardware differences

Well, the differences in sensors go beyond megapixels - different sensors can just "look" totally different and produce totally different output.

I've moved from a Canon 8 megapixel camera (20D) to a Samsung GX10 (K10D clone) and I just way prefer the colour, even if high ISO can have some problems with "banding" which drives me mad.

Other than the banding, I just like the way the pictures look, and the noise at <ISO800 can even be aesthetically pleasing sometimes.


So with the same lens, the only real difference between one camera and another would be...
- metering and automation features (the K10d has fantastic features like the very useful green button and TAv mode)
- the output of the sensor itself (which has many attributes, not just pixel count)

06-26-2007, 02:30 AM   #9
and
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,471
Those pictures didnt show up for me so I cant comment.

Some other comments:
The picture quality difference between k10d and k100d shouldnt be that big, the k100d will be better indoors at high iso because of lower noise. The k10d will be better in those cases where you need to crop a lot, because it has more pixels, it will also produce better prints if you print LARGE, again because of more pixels.

Using the camera just casually and not having to crop so often, the k100d might even be better since the better iso performance indoors will come in handy more often than the better cropping potentiall. Also I believe it has been determined that the jpeg quality straight out of camera is better with the k100d, so if you dont want to shoot raw and pp then it should be better as well.

k10d's advantages are faster speed and better ergonomics, meaning more controls on the camera. also features like wireless flash and sdm support, availability of vertical grip, faster continous shooting for more frames etc.

Finally Id like to recommend the 16-45 instead of the kit lens. The kit lens seems to be better than some other kit lenses, I dont know about the olympus one. But I think the 16-45 seems like a good performer at an affordable price. I got a sigma kit lens when i bought my DS and I bought my k10d as body only so I havent tried the pentax kit lens myself, but I speak from reading many posts and reviews and seeing pictures from the lenses.

And another thing: I think all the current dSLR's are good, and in the hands of a skilled photographer, any one of them can produce spectacular shots. Its important to invest in a good lens though. And remember in 5 years the k100d will be outdated technology, but for instance the FA 43 limited will be spectacular for years and years to come.
06-26-2007, 06:17 PM   #10
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 296
QuoteOriginally posted by Kguru Quote
......Where do I see benjikan's work?
Ben has lots of posts on this site, some with images attached, which include links to several sites where his work can be viewed.
06-28-2007, 12:46 AM   #11
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
according to what I have read about 18-55 DA SMC (the kit lens for K100D) it's pretty good for a kit lens, certainly better than Canon and Nikon offerings for kits...
maybe you would be better with 16 -45 though...
06-28-2007, 06:52 AM   #12
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 151
The 16-45 is better, but make no mistake the 18-55 is a fantastic lens. It is EXTREMELY quick, and also makes a good pairing with the Pentax 55-200 lens. Pentax lenses are my favorite, and thats why I chose them over Canon and Nikon.
06-28-2007, 09:42 AM   #13
Veteran Member
Kguru's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Perth - WestAust
Posts: 602
Original Poster
Thanks for your advice.
I'm still pondering on the price difference. K100D w/ kit lens for $420 after rebate, or w/ 16-45mm lens for (380 body + 270 lens =) $650.

Somebody has said the 16-45 at less than $300 is a steal, but based on above pricing it poses the question is it worth seven times the kit lens? No point getting both as they are so similar in FL range.
06-28-2007, 10:07 PM   #14
Veteran Member
WMBP's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,496
QuoteOriginally posted by Kguru Quote
I'm still pondering on the price difference. K100D w/ kit lens for $420 after rebate, or w/ 16-45mm lens for (380 body + 270 lens =) $650.

Somebody has said the 16-45 at less than $300 is a steal, but based on above pricing it poses the question is it worth seven times the kit lens? No point getting both as they are so similar in FL range.

In the DSLR world, paying more money doesn't mean you get better photographs. It means that you get a better photographic tool. A better tool doesn't make for a better result in itself, it simply makes it possible for you to achieve results more efficiently, or more reliably. A more expensive camera has more options, or better options, is sturdier (the K10D is weather-sealed, for example, while the K100D is not), faster, etc.

There are a few elements that determine the quality of the photos you take. The photographer is the most important. After that, the lens is probably next - and you can use the same lenses on the K100D that you use on the K10D. The rest of the camera's features are important, too - the sensor, the buffer, the processor, and everything else. The faster K10D, shooting in continuous mode especially, might catch a shot that the K100D would miss. The more efficient controls on the K10D might make it possible for the photographer to adjust quickly and capture a shot that might be missed on the K100D. You might be able to keep shooting with a K10D after the first drops of rain begin to fall, because it's weather-sealed, where you would probably want to put the K100D back in the bag before it got wet. You might get a manually focused shot a wee bit sharper with a K10D because its viewfinder is clearer than the K100D's.

But if the light's good, and if you have a few seconds to think before you shoot, and if the subject is in range and you have the right lens, and if you don't have to worry about printing really large, and assuming that you actually know how to use the camera (!), then to see the difference in technical quality between a shot taken with a K100D and the same shot taken with a K10D, you'd have to get out a magnifying glass - or view the photos on your computer screen enlarged. And even then you might not see it. To put it more simply, if you're capable of taking great photos with the K10D, you should be capable of taking great photos with the K100D, too.

So the difference isn't exactly about the photos - but that doesn't mean that the more expensive camera isn't worth the money. You just need to understand what you're getting.

And is the 16-45 seven times better than the kit 18-55 lens? Depends on how you do math. First, while the 16-45 is bargain priced considering its quality, the 18-55 is REALLY sold at a discount, because it's basically the lens they give away with camera bodies. If it were really sold on its own, the 18-55 would surely sell for no less than HALF what the 16-45 sells for; so it would be fairer to ask if its worth twice the money. But let me note also that, in the world of camera equipment, much like in the world of computer hardware, to get an X% improvement in quality, you have to pay 2*X more. There are a couple of reasons for this, but the main one may be that price really rules the market, so the demand for cheapest goods is much greater than the demand for the higher-priced gear; and that in turn means that the manufacturing costs for the better quality items are going to be higher, because fewer units are going to be sold. And THAT fact causes makers like Pentax to want to increase their profit margins on higher priced goods - otherwise they wouldn't be worth making at all.

The sad truth is, figuring out what camera to buy is really difficult. It depends not just on how much you can afford to spend, but also on what kind of photography you want to do.

If money matters more than anything else, then it's easy, get the K100D because its less expensive. And even if the difference in price between the camera bodies isn't all that big a deal to you, if you buy the K100D, you'll have money left over to spend on a much better lens. And since you spent less on the K100D body, you might be willing to upgrade sooner than if you'd invested more heavily in a K10D. Certainly, if you want the scene modes that the K100D offers (and which the K10D lacks), buy the K100D. If you're shooting a lot indoors in low light without flash, you might be persuaded that the K100D is dramatically less noisy than the K10D. (I think the K100D is less noisy at ISO 800 or 1600, but not dramatically. But I seem to be in the minority in holding that opinion.)

On the other hand, if you plan to use continuous mode a lot, or if you shoot so many photos that the ergonomics of the camera really really make a difference to you, or if you shoot so many photos that you want to have that extra battery in the grip, or you do a lot of bracketing and you want the greater flexibility of the K10D in that regard, or you plan to make big prints or you'd like the freedom to do a bit more cropping in post-processing, or you'd really like to be able to save Raw files as DNG right in the camera - then go for the K10D.

Will
06-29-2007, 05:56 PM   #15
Veteran Member
Kguru's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Perth - WestAust
Posts: 602
Original Poster
Thanks Will for the painstaking advice.
Basically I'd like to take wide-angle group photos, plus sharp detailed portraits (showing skin pores for example ) without having to change lens so I'm not considering primes. I'm not sure if the 18-55 kit lens is good enough to give me sharp detailed portraits or should I spend the extra $230 (can afford but rather not if I don't have to) for the 16-45. Thanks again everyone.

Last edited by Kguru; 06-29-2007 at 06:05 PM.
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, dslr, k100d, k10d, lens, photography
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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:43 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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