«

The Pentax K Series cameras are a little past their 1/2 year (K10) and 1
year (K100D, K110D) times-on-market. How about some hand-on owner's
impression of these cameras?

- Oveall quality
- Operating ease
- Picture Quality
- Practical K-Mount utility
- Quirks (lotsa stuff about jpg processing, etc. What is real?)
- Happy, Mad?
- Etc.

Thanks
RonB

"RonB" <> wrote:
> The Pentax K Series cameras are a little past their 1/2 year (K10) and 1
> year (K100D, K110D) times-on-market. How about some hand-on owner's
> impression of these cameras?

Not me, but a friend I respect highly is a very happy Pentax user.

> - Oveall quality
> - Operating ease
> - Picture Quality
> - Practical K-Mount utility
> - Quirks (lotsa stuff about jpg processing, etc. What is real?)
> - Happy, Mad?

The things he's saying in favor of the system include the image
stabilization (it just works, with every lens, even the long ones, despite
what we Canonistas say) and the wide selection of lenses, including many
incredibly compact primes.

He likes it so much, he went out and bought a Pentax 645 system!

The only problem with Pentax is that they have not yet announced a
full-frame camera.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

David J. Littleboy wrote:
>
> The only problem with Pentax is that they have not yet announced a
> full-frame camera.
>

I thought that they'd announced a 645 digital, thus better/larger than 35mm.

"frederick" <> wrote in message news:1177554824.18068@ftpsrv1...
> David J. Littleboy wrote:
>>
>> The only problem with Pentax is that they have not yet announced a
>> full-frame camera.
>
> I thought that they'd announced a 645 digital, thus better/larger than
> 35mm.

Yes. But it's more than 10 times more expensive than the cameras the OP
asked about, so I ignored it. (More accurately, didn't even think about it.)

FWIW and IMHO, MF digital is problematic. Since the unit sales are so small,
the technology is nowhere near as mature as APS-C or 24x36mm dSLR
technology. Also, it's not "full frame", so has wide angle problems. And
since sensor fabrication costs go up exponentially with area, it's never
going to be cheap.

So it's largely a fantasy for real people. At US$2500 or so, 24x36 digital
is "affordable" to anyone who can afford a car, although most will not chose
to spend that much on a camera.

David J. Littleboy
Who has a 5D and an L5, but no car, in
Tokyo, Japan

David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "frederick" <> wrote in message news:1177554824.18068@ftpsrv1...
>> David J. Littleboy wrote:
>>> The only problem with Pentax is that they have not yet announced a
>>> full-frame camera.
>> I thought that they'd announced a 645 digital, thus better/larger than
>> 35mm.
>
> Yes. But it's more than 10 times more expensive than the cameras the OP
> asked about, so I ignored it. (More accurately, didn't even think about it.)
>
> FWIW and IMHO, MF digital is problematic. Since the unit sales are so small,
> the technology is nowhere near as mature as APS-C or 24x36mm dSLR
> technology. Also, it's not "full frame", so has wide angle problems. And
> since sensor fabrication costs go up exponentially with area, it's never
> going to be cheap.
>
> So it's largely a fantasy for real people. At US$2500 or so, 24x36 digital
> is "affordable" to anyone who can afford a car, although most will not chose
> to spend that much on a camera.
>
Yeah - but that US$2,500 is still 5 times more than an "entry" dslr, and
there's only minor differences in IQ. (yeah - I sound like Ken Rockwell).

"frederick" <> wrote:
> David J. Littleboy wrote:
>>
>> So it's largely a fantasy for real people. At US$2500 or so, 24x36
>> digital is "affordable" to anyone who can afford a car, although most
>> will not chose to spend that much on a camera.
>>
> Yeah - but that US$2,500 is still 5 times more than an "entry" dslr, and
> there's only minor differences in IQ.

Exactly. Unless one needs 12x18 and larger prints that are going to be
compared with medium and large format, or one needs sharp images at wide
apertures in low light, or one needs tilt, shift, or extreme wide angle, the
10MP entry level dSLRs are fine.

I suspect, though, that the next generation of the 5D will probably provide
a larger step up from APS-C. (Since the new 1DmkIII sensor technology
implies a 16MP 5DmkII.)

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "frederick" <> wrote:
>> David J. Littleboy wrote:
>>> So it's largely a fantasy for real people. At US$2500 or so, 24x36
>>> digital is "affordable" to anyone who can afford a car, although most
>>> will not chose to spend that much on a camera.
>>>
>> Yeah - but that US$2,500 is still 5 times more than an "entry" dslr, and
>> there's only minor differences in IQ.
>
> Exactly. Unless one needs 12x18 and larger prints that are going to be
> compared with medium and large format, or one needs sharp images at wide
> apertures in low light, or one needs tilt, shift, or extreme wide angle, the
> 10MP entry level dSLRs are fine.
>
> I suspect, though, that the next generation of the 5D will probably provide
> a larger step up from APS-C. (Since the new 1DmkIII sensor technology
> implies a 16MP 5DmkII.)
>
You are probably right, but having seen some (even compressed jpegs)
from 39mp H3d, 1ds II 35mm frame size isn't "full frame" any more.
Some time not so far away, Canon will need some new tricks.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:18:32 +0900, David J. Littleboy wrote:

> "frederick" <> wrote:
>> David J. Littleboy wrote:
>>>
>>> So it's largely a fantasy for real people. At US$2500 or so, 24x36
>>> digital is "affordable" to anyone who can afford a car, although most
>>> will not chose to spend that much on a camera.
>>>
>> Yeah - but that US$2,500 is still 5 times more than an "entry" dslr, and
>> there's only minor differences in IQ.
>
> Exactly. Unless one needs 12x18 and larger prints that are going to be
> compared with medium and large format, or one needs sharp images at wide
> apertures in low light, or one needs tilt, shift, or extreme wide angle, the
> 10MP entry level dSLRs are fine.
>
> I suspect, though, that the next generation of the 5D will probably provide
> a larger step up from APS-C. (Since the new 1DmkIII sensor technology
> implies a 16MP 5DmkII.)
>
> David J. Littleboy
> Tokyo, Japan

Canon have that technology already although it is pricy - 1Ds mkll

--
Neil
reverse 'r' and'a' - delete 'l' for email

On Apr 25, 9:50 pm, "David J. Littleboy" <davi...@gol.com> wrote:
> "frederick" <l...@sea.com> wrote in messagenews:1177554824.18068@ftpsrv1...
> > David J. Littleboy wrote:
>
> >> The only problem with Pentax is that they have not yet announced a
> >> full-frame camera.
>
> > I thought that they'd announced a 645 digital, thus better/larger than
> > 35mm.
>
> Yes. But it's more than 10 times more expensive than the cameras the OP
> asked about, so I ignored it. (More accurately, didn't even think about it.)
>
> FWIW and IMHO, MF digital is problematic. Since the unit sales are so small,
> the technology is nowhere near as mature as APS-C or 24x36mm dSLR
> technology. Also, it's not "full frame", so has wide angle problems. And
> since sensor fabrication costs go up exponentially with area, it's never
> going to be cheap.
>
> So it's largely a fantasy for real people. At US$2500 or so, 24x36 digital
> is "affordable" to anyone who can afford a car, although most will not chose
> to spend that much on a camera.
>
> David J. Littleboy
> Who has a 5D and an L5, but no car, in
> Tokyo, Japan

It's a wonder you can afford *any* sort of camera, wot with the cost
of living in Tokyo!

--
YOP...

"Nervous Nick" <> wrote:
> On Apr 25, 9:50 pm, "David J. Littleboy" <davi...@gol.com> wrote:
>> "frederick" <l...@sea.com> wrote in
>> messagenews:1177554824.18068@ftpsrv1...
>> > David J. Littleboy wrote:
>>
>> So it's largely a fantasy for real people. At US$2500 or so, 24x36
>> digital
>> is "affordable" to anyone who can afford a car, although most will not
>> chose
>> to spend that much on a camera.
>>
>> David J. Littleboy
>> Who has a 5D and an L5, but no car, in
>> Tokyo, Japan
>
> It's a wonder you can afford *any* sort of camera, wot with the cost
> of living in Tokyo!

No car, no kids. Lots of guitars and cameras.

But the cost of living here is only bad if one insists on living like an
American. There are 124 million people here (including our CEO) who know how
to find things at sensible prices.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan