[benjikan]

I am quite taken a back by many of the questions regarding the pro capacity of the K10D. There have been the doubting Thomas's that ask.."Is there a Pro Pentax?" or why doesn't Pentax make a pro camera etc etc etc. The answer is this. The K10D is the Nikon D200 of Pentax. It compares favorably with all of the top end dslr's on the market. So why these insecurities? I think it has more to do with the perceived value of the camera. If it sold for 1500€, the public perception would be the contrary. Perhaps Pentax should re-consider their pricing just to satisfy those who perceive value solely by the price tag.

[barbosas]

I tottaly agree.

"If it's not expensive then it's not good"

Things aren't always that way...

[Fireball]

Oh so true, Benjamin!

The old age adage "You pay for what you get" is true....to an extent.

Also, I often think that many people "oogle" over features in pro camera only because the camera is labelled as such.

As with any sort of machinery/newfangled doohickey, the equipment is only as good as the doofus behind it!

(By the way...proud to know that you're a fellow Canadian! Is it necessary to be fluent in French to live in Paris? (A little North American ignorance on my part!))

Cheers,

TW

[MRRiley]

Right on Ben....

What makes a camera a PRO camera isnt the price but the fact that established PROs use it. You meet that criteria very well...

So, the next time someone asks me if Pentax makes a Pro camera I will mention the K10D and send them straight off to your site.

Frankly, Pentax needs to do more to reinforce this perception If I was Pentax Advertising (hey are you reading this guys?) I'd be running adverts in the top mags with profiles of guys like you.

Mike

[eljustino]

I've recently jumped ship from Canon. I like the features of the K10D (I have a Samsung GX10!) and find that TAv mode and "User" mode mean I can get set up to take a shot quicker.

What clinches it for me is I just love how the Samsung/K10D pictures look - colour is sooo smooth and rich.

BUT BUT BUT... I'm afraid having used Canon Ultrasonic lenses, Pentax AF is just sooo slow and inaccurate it can be painful. I have adapted and for now I'm very happy with my new camera.

But surely pros need FAST ACCURATE AF to be sure of getting their shot... and I'd say that has a lot to do wth the choice of camera.


If the K10d has no high ISO banding and fast/accurate AF, it would be 100% perfect... in every other way I am 100% happy with it.

[benjikan]

Oh so true, Benjamin!

The old age adage "You pay for what you get" is true....to an extent.

Also, I often think that many people "oogle" over features in pro camera only because the camera is labelled as such.

As with any sort of machinery/newfangled doohickey, the equipment is only as good as the doofus behind it!

(By the way...proud to know that you're a fellow Canadian! Is it necessary to be fluent in French to live in Paris? (A little North American ignorance on my part!))

Cheers,

TW

It isn't necessary, but if you make an attempt and try they really appreciate the effort and give you greater respect.

[RMabo]

BUT BUT BUT... I'm afraid having used Canon Ultrasonic lenses, Pentax AF is just sooo slow and inaccurate it can be painful. I have adapted and for now I'm very happy with my new camera.

I have tested all my Pentax autofocus lenses with the K10D, and accuracy is 100%. However, when I tried my Sigma AF 24 f/2.8, it backfocused slightly.
My experience is that if the camera and/or the lenses are front- or backfocusing, then the camera and/or the lenses are miscalibrated and this can be fixed by Pentax (for Pentax original lenses).

Another thing regarding autofocus - is that if you use the center-point and re-composing technique, you change the camera to subject distance so the camera is no longer focused on the subject. It is here the 11 point AF comes in so handy, select a point that is the closest to the subject to minimise the re-composing as much as possible. Another factor is that the AF sensors are much larger than displayed in the viewfinder, they cover a larger area. And the AF picks up the closest thing to the camera to focus upon. Say that you, for example, focus on a structure (not a flat, plain, surface) the AF will detect the highest point of the structure and focus upon it, even if it is very small and lies out of the visible AF indicication point in the viewfinder. Care must be taken when shooting.

Oh, lenses with SDM (Supersonic Direct Motor) will be released for Pentax after the summer. I believe that you will enjoy their performance.

Take care
R

[RMabo]

I believe that what Pentax lacks in many countries are pro-support and service. If you are working pro, you can't wait one or two weeks to have your equipment serviced and fixed, you need at least a replacement the same day. Pro's also needs a hiring facility for those big telelenses that cost as much as a small car. If Pentax are interrested in the pro market, they need to set up a pro-oriented operation or division at their distributors. Pro's seldom want to go through the standard consumer channels, they need salespersons and servicepersonell that understand the needs of the professionals and talks their language.

Take care
R

[wll]

Oh, lenses with SDM (Supersonic Direct Motor) will be released for Pentax after the summer. I believe that you will enjoy their performance.

Take care
R[/QUOTE]

I think after summer Pentax will be getting their act in gear and the new camera buzz will start too :-)

Looking forward to the new K1D (if that is what it will be called) in maybe spring?.


wll

[sharpshoota]

I think the picture quality from RAW files is fantastic!

I think the AF sucks ass for a "PRO" camera. Pentax needs to fix that and make it faster next time around.

[RiceHigh]

I am quite taken a back by many of the questions regarding the pro capacity of the K10D. There have been the doubting Thomas's that ask.."Is there a Pro Pentax?" or why doesn't Pentax make a pro camera etc etc etc. The answer is this. The K10D is the Nikon D200 of Pentax. It compares favorably with all of the top end dslr's on the market. So why these insecurities? I think it has more to do with the perceived value of the camera. If it sold for 1500€, the public perception would be the contrary. Perhaps Pentax should re-consider their pricing just to satisfy those who perceive value solely by the price tag.

Ben, I have to disagree with you. The K10D is not in the D200 class and it is never a D200 equivalence.

1. It focuses much slower and less accurate than the D200;

2. It meters far less accurately and consistently than the D200;

3. Continous shooting speed is less: 3fps Vs 5fps;

4. Continuous AF is slow with much lower hit rate;

5. Low light AF speed and accurate is of huge difference (just check the pophoto lab test results to see the differences);

6. If you use both continuous AF with continuous frame mode, the K10D cannot keep the frame rate of 3fps and D200 can keep at 5fps with more frames in focus;

7. Time lag figures as measured by the Imaging Resource in lab is a huge difference, no matter what focusing mode is chosen. The D200 is only having a mere of 57ms which is close to the D2 series. The K10 figures is more or less around 200ms except for prefocused in AF single mode, which is still around 100ms (yet slower than the Canon 30D which is 68ms);

8. Construction and build are felt differently. D200 is of metal alloy body whereas K10 is of plastic. The weather sealed buttons, switches and knobs of D200 is sharp and crisp to turn with clear cut positioning where as the K10D ones are rather stiff - the K100D is much better here and similar to the D200;

Afterall, in a few words, you get what you pay for, it is the universal truth. What do one expect for a DSLR body with the feature riched specifications of the K10D but it is just sold at a price a little bit more expensive than the 400D and D40X?

[-spam-]

Ben, I have to disagree with you. The K10D is not in the D200 class and it is never a D200 equivalence.

And for once, I am going to have to agree with you on that. I was going to reply to the exact copy of this post that he cross posted on ThePhotoForum.com with pretty much what you said there.

[Falcons]

I'm no pro by any stretch of the imagination and I have never even touched a nikon, have had a little play with a canon 20d, so I have no real comparison to go off.

My own experience is with the Pentax *istDS i mainly photograph my kids and martial arts. Now my kids move at the speed of light and much of my martial arts stuff is in dimly lit gymnasiums and I may be a bit slow when I am in the ring sparring - but most competitors are blistering fast. The AF on the DS performs excellently for me and I prefer to anticipate my shots -so I don't machine gun. To be honest most of my shots are in focus and the ones that aren't are generally not the cameras fault.

I always have a little chuckle when I hear on here " I am sick of missing fantastic shots because of slow AF and frame rate etc." It always makes me wonder why they have never asked themselves why the ones they do manage to get in focus are always crap.

Seriously I don't know how fast you guys really need to go with AF. I have heard that the Pentax AF is more accurate as it does a final adjustment whereas the Nikon slides straight in to the point but doesn't adjust from there hence faster AF but less accurate. Please tell me if I have heard wrong.

I used a 20d at the V8 supercars it belonged to one of the teams photographers I seriously didn't pick up any noticeable difference in AF speed and that is focussing on a car going 250kmh. But hey I ain't quite quick enough to count in 1/10ths of seconds.

Maybe you pros need nanosecond focussing speeds and 100 frames per second and I sincerely hope that one day you get it but for me I am happy and with the new SDM lenses (if I can ever afford one) I will be ecstatic.

However may I suggest a video camera for those that need to machine gun - can't stand the thought of you missing that perfect shot.

[anomaly]

Ben, I have to disagree with you. The K10D is not in the D200 class and it is never a D200 equivalence.

1. It focuses much slower and less accurate than the D200;

2. It meters far less accurately and consistently than the D200;

3. Continous shooting speed is less: 3fps Vs 5fps;

4. Continuous AF is slow with much lower hit rate;

5. Low light AF speed and accurate is of huge difference (just check the pophoto lab test results to see the differences);

6. If you use both continuous AF with continuous frame mode, the K10D cannot keep the frame rate of 3fps and D200 can keep at 5fps with more frames in focus;

7. Time lag figures as measured by the Imaging Resource in lab is a huge difference, no matter what focusing mode is chosen. The D200 is only having a mere of 57ms which is close to the D2 series. The K10 figures is more or less around 200ms except for prefocused in AF single mode, which is still around 100ms (yet slower than the Canon 30D which is 68ms);

8. Construction and build are felt differently. D200 is of metal alloy body whereas K10 is of plastic. The weather sealed buttons, switches and knobs of D200 is sharp and crisp to turn with clear cut positioning where as the K10D ones are rather stiff - the K100D is much better here and similar to the D200;

Afterall, in a few words, you get what you pay for, it is the universal truth. What do one expect for a DSLR body with the feature riched specifications of the K10D but it is just sold at a price a little bit more expensive than the 400D and D40X?

Pro is not a catch all phrase really, the things you mentioned (except maybe the metering) would not make much difference to a pro in benjikan's line of work where there is not alot of fast action (sports) that would need a fast frame rate and the lighting is controlled. Many fashion photographers shoot manual as well.

[ZaphodB]

The K10D is not a pro camera. According to Nikon, neither is the D200. It's "ideal for those looking for a camera to bridge the gap between the professional and the entry level Digital SLRs"... sounds like a camera designed for the "advanced/rich amateur" market to me... but the D200 is good enough that pros will use it as a backup or even primary camera. The K10D is obviously good enough that a few pros will use it too...

So really, who cares whether a camera is called "Pro" if it's good enough for your purposes?

--------

"If it's not expensive then it's not good"

Things aren't always that way...

Tell me about it... on another forum, someone just asked whether he should get a Nikon F5 or a Nikon F6. When asked if he needed something that advanced and expensive, he said his dad had always taught him "you get what you pay for" and he didn't want junk. It didn't seem to occur to him that he could buy a less expensive but still very good camera that might be better for his purposes... by the way he proceeded to say he had no idea what different focal lengths did. And the guy wanted to buy an F6....

Another guy on the same forum always tells people they shouldn't put third-party glass on a D200. No number of reviews will convince him that a Tokina or Tamron can perform as well as a Nikkor. Third-party glass to him is "cheap". He asked why you would buy a D200 and then not buy the best glass you could get. My reply was, if you're so concerned about getting the best possible, why buy a D200 and not a D2Xs? He didn't have an answer...

Sure to some extent you get what you pay for, but that doesn't mean that anything cheaper than the most expensive can't be good. I will never understand that mentality...