The Pentax K100D is a dSLR, the Fuji S6500/S6000 are not dSLR cameras.

How much do you know or want to know about photography? Digital image
processing? Willing to learn and experiment?
You do not need a dSLR to be a serious photographer and create hi quality
images and there are real drawbacks because of the size and weight of the
gear involved. The dSLR can pay off in speed of use and versatility if you
understand how to use it and are willing to lug the darn thing around.
Hi quality EVF cameras are more than good enough in the right hands.
Contrarily the best gear in the wrong hands, which I suspect is a major
issue with this newsgroup, is less than worthless.

According to  <hin_man@yahoo.com>:

    Well ... my move from P&S (Kodak Brownie Hawkeye) was so long
ago that I doubt that my experience would be much help.  The first
camera to follow that was a folding Zeiss "Ikonta 520" (620 or 120 roll
film, 16 2-1/4x1-7/8  exposures per roll).

    Then was a Zeiss "Contaflex Super".  Sort of a SLR, however
without truly interchangeable lenses.

    The a Miranda F -- the first fully interchangeable lense camera
which I owned.

    Then a lot of Nikon F bodies and lenses -- all used.

    Digital SLRs started with a Kodak/Nikon hybrid -- a Nikon N90s
converted to digital by Kodak.

    Then the Nikon D70.

    Someday -- a Nikon D200.

    But you can see that the move from the P&S to the DSLR was
through so many different stages that it would be difficult to match it
to your more direct move.

    Good Luck,
        DoN.

On Oct 16, 6:46 pm, hin_...@yahoo.com wrote:

Your choice, the fuji is a EVF camera with a small sensor and an
average lens for those cameras. If you want to just take snap shots
with a wide range lens this is probably a good choice. As with most
small sensor cameras you will be limited to the lower  ISO levels,
unless this camera has one of the improved Fuji sensors. The Pentax is
a low end DSLR 6mp sensor, anti dust and incamera anti shake. This
camera has had good reviews the 6mp Sony sensor while there are newer
higher mp sensors out there it is a proven design and is capable of
excellent results. Remember the photographer makes the picture not the
camera. The camera is one of the smaller and light weight DSLRs, again
a middling kit lens. What really makes Pentax interesting is they have
several very compact prime lenses (zooms ?) that would make this camera
smaller than some EVF cameras. But the choise is up to you, look at the
cameras, preferably at a place you can test them, camera store as
oppesed to best buy. Then try to buy from the camera store too. We lost
the only good camera store in our area, the owner said that people were
testing the cameras at his store and buying them at Best Buy, even
though he would match the Best Buy price.

Tom

Don't hesitate.  The learning curve is neither steep nor high, and to
boot you get near instant feedback via the on camera monitor.  Your
shooting skills, in particular composition, will improve very rapidly.

And that is far more important that the mere specs of the cameras.  You
might consider jumping over the K100D to the K10D and be set up for the
next 3 - 5 years.

Cheers,
Alan

I shot with a point-and-shoot (the 2MP Fujifilm Finepix 2650) for a
year or so before I decided I wanted a better camera. I didn't reach
that decision until I started running into situations in which my
camera prevented me from getting the pictures I wanted. For instance,
the shutter lag made it very difficult to capture an image at exactly
the right time (such as someone blowing out candles on a cake). Another
example: the camera only operated at ISO 100, so around dusk the
shutter speeds became unusably slow. There were other issues as well,
but I was not going to replace my camera to fix its shortcomings until
I knew that those shortcomings were actually impacting my photography.

When, eventually, I decided that I had reached that point, I began
looking at my options. I ended up considering the Canon 300D (my other
options were the Nikon D70 and Canon 10D, but they were more money, and
I didn't feel they were worth the additional expense). Because the 300D
was still more money than I wanted to spend, I looked at some high-end
non-DSLRs. However, the ones that seemed worth getting (e.g. the Sony
DSC-F727) weren't much cheaper than the 300D, and I felt that for the
$100 savings or whatever it was, I would be giving up a lot of
functionality.

This whole process took months. It ended when the 20D was released, and
a guy I know decided to upgrade his 300D. I found out he was selling
his 300D, looked at the price, and decided it was too good a deal to
pass up. I got the 300D, battery grip, 18-55 kit lens, 80-200 lens,
infrared remote, and a 512 MB card for roughly the price that the
300D+kit lens sold for new.

I found that learning the basics of the camera was quite easy, and was
taking pictures the same day I picked up the camera. I had never
touched an SLR before, but I knew roughly what I was getting into
because I had done a lot of reading beforehand. The biggest adjustment
was getting used to using the viewfinder instead of the LCD. With the
camera in full auto mode, I found it was actually easier to use than my
P&S, which meant that I could learn the advanced features at my own
pace.

It's important to understand that I'm a technology geek. The 20+
buttons, dials, and other controls on the camera didn't intimidate me;
rather, I was looking forward to figuring them all out. And, figure
them out I did, and now I can tell you exactly what they all do, and
how and when to use them. But I didn't need to - I was taking pictures
before I understood the camera, and they were still turning out pretty
good.

I started out with two cheap lenses: the 18-55 kit lens, and Canon's
cheap 80-200 zoom. These were excellent lenses to start with, because
they cover a nice range of focal lengths, and are cheap. Neither of
them are particularly good, but the pictures I got from them were
better than the pictures I got from my point-and-shoot, so I was happy.

Since then, I've continued my philosophy of only buying camera gear
when my existing equipment is preventing me from getting the pictures I
want. I've replaced the 80-200 with the 75-300 IS (because even my
inexperienced eye was unhappy with the quality of the 80-200, and I
wanted IS on my long lens because I tend to have shaky hands). I've
purchased the 50mm f/1.8 (cheap, high-quality, and it works well for
low light). I'm still using the 18-55, because it's still suiting my
needs (yeah, I've looked at replacements, but haven't found them
compelling). I also got an external flash to improve my photos in dim
light. I originally bought a cheap $30 tripod; just last week I
replaced it with a nicer $200 model (again: the cheap tripod was
holding me back. It didn't work well with the 75-300mm lens, and it
didn't work in a vertical position. I lost several shots because of
these problems.). I've installed the hacked firmware, which is free,
and even -that- I didn't do until I found a good reason for it (doing
some close-up photography, I decided I really wanted mirror lock-up).

So, to address your concerns:

You don't need a "bag of lenses"; one or two zooms will do nicely. The
learning curve isn't steep at all, because if you put your DSLR into
automatic mode it'll do all the work for you, and you can learn its
features at whatever rate you find comfortable.

I have no regrets about going the DSLR route instead of the advanced
non-DSLR route. It's allowed me to upgrade the parts of the camera
system that were limiting me, and leave the rest alone. Adding a f/1.8
lens to the system cost me $100; with a P&S, I'd have to replace the
entire camera to add a feature like that.

My ultimate advice: Make sure that you only buy equipment that fixes
problems you're actually having. Don't spend more money on "better"
gear until you know that the lesser gear is limiting you in whatever
type of photography you do.

- Darryl