Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / December 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Review of Pentax K10D off "price grabber"

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
RichA - 05 Dec 2006 00:48 GMT
This review seems...very well-written for a user.  I don't doubt much
of what is said, but....

Excellent offering from Pentax
Strengths: A lot of features and excellent image quality and build.
Weaknesses: Requires good lenses to get the best out of - since a 10MP
sensor will easily show flaws in average/bad lenses.
Summary: The K10D was a highly anticipated camera ever since it was
announced in September of 2006. Now that it is out and I have been
using one for about a week I can easily recommend this dSLR to anyone
interested in a verstatile, well-built and extremely functional dSLR.
It was most definetely worth the wait and for a price tag that is very
reasonable for everything that this camera offers, it is one of the
best buys for a sub semi-pro body. The camera is in a class above the
Nikon D80 and Canon Xti yet the cost is a little more than the Xti and
in-line with the D80. A remarkable achievement by Pentax considering
the K10D pretty much skimps on nothing.

It has the superb ergonomics and handling, a big and bright pentaprism
viewfinder, excellent layout of controls and buttons, highly
customizable features and lots of external controls for quick access to
settings such as Metering, Focus points etc. It is also constructed
extremely well and feels perfectly balanced in the hand. The grip is
also superb and the camera just generally feels like it was designed
with the photographer in mind. Also lastly throw in the weather and
dust resistant body and you know you have a superbly built camera in
your hands. No other camera in the market even comes close to offering
such a feature in a camera under $1500.

The image quality is excellent - the Pentax metering system is very
reliable and the camera produces beautifully rendered images with great
detail, contrast and tone. The High ISO performance is in-line with the
other 10MP contenders such as the D80 and the Xti with the camera
offering low-noise levels but also superb tones and sharpness even at
high ISO's. The same cannot be said for some other 10MP dSLR's which
shall remain unnamed. The camera also offers two RAW formats including
the Adobe DNG format. Add in the built-in CCD shift stabilization
system entitled Shake Reduction (SR) by Pentax and you have a serious
low-light machine. The CCD shift mechanism also provides the feature of
Dust Removal to shake off those pesky dust spots that may get stuck on
the camera when changing lenses. It also accepts the new SDHC format SD
cards and can do continous shooting at 3 fps up to 9 RAW images or
until the memory card is full when shooting Jpeg's so long as you have
a fast enough SD card.

This camera promised a lot when it was introduced by Pentax in
September and I can confidently say that it has indeed met and exceeded
all my expectations. There are so many nice touches that they cannot
all be mentioned in a review but I am finding smart and useful touches
even still. Some other superb usability features are two new modes such
as the Sensitivity priority (Sv) and Shutter & Aperture Priority mode
(TAv). The Hyper Program mode (P) works very well and with just a touch
of the two controls wheels the camera can instantly be swithced into Av
or Tv modes. Another great feature is the digital preview image. This
lets you take an image and displays it on the big and bright 2.5" LCD
monitor and make adjustments. For example, you can turn the blinking
highlight/shadow indicators on/off to see if any highlights are blown
or if exposure needs to be corrected or you can go into the WB settings
and change the WB settings and see the changing results in effect on
the preview image that is stored in the cameras buffer (but not saved -
so it doesnt take up space in your memory card). The camera is
literally filled with smart touches such as this.

The K10D is an absolute joy to use and couple it with the reputable
Pentax lenses and you have yourself a camera that delivers in every
aspect - it is also the first Pentax body to accept the upcoming DA*
line of pro-quality lenses that are also weather and dust sealed and
feature ultrasonic motors for fast and quiet focusing. If youre looking
for a dSLR that offers a ton of functionaly and build quality along
with superb image quality - look no further than the K10D - anyone who
is new to the dSLR world who may be thinking of getting an Xti, A100 or
D80 now has a camera that is significantly more full-featured and
well-constructed than any of the other current 10MP cameras in the
under $1000 price level - throw in the built in stabilization which
works on any lens you can stick on the camera and it offers superb
value for money. This feature alone will save hundreds of dollars of
premium many users will have to pay for to get stabilized lenses for
their Canon or Nikon cameras. For anyone thinking about switching
systems from their current one the K10D opens a whole new world and
contends some serious thought in favor of the Pentax brand. For current
Pentax users the K10D is the next natural step in the upgrade path and
is the easy choice when looking for a dSLR body that is in the semi-pro
class and above the current 10MP entry-level dSLR's. The bar has just
been raised.
U-Know-Who - 05 Dec 2006 03:04 GMT
> This review seems...very well-written for a user.  I don't doubt much
> of what is said, but....

Snip

Troll, troll, troll your boat...
mogh baba - 05 Dec 2006 22:04 GMT
>> This review seems...very well-written for a user.  I don't doubt much
>> of what is said, but....
>
>Snip
>
>Troll, troll, troll your boat...

you introduce yoursef?

Mogh
Jan Böhme - 05 Dec 2006 22:23 GMT
RichA skrev:

> Add in the built-in CCD shift stabilization
> system entitled Shake Reduction (SR) by Pentax and you have a serious
> low-light machine.

Unfortunately, this review doesn't give an account of how _efficient_
the SR is in the K10D. Given that the SR in the K100D gave singularly
unimpressive results in the hands of Phil Askey at dpreview.com, there
is some reason for caution on this point.

Jan B?hme
Marc Sabatella - 06 Dec 2006 00:46 GMT
> Unfortunately, this review doesn't give an account of how _efficient_
> the SR is in the K10D. Given that the SR in the K100D gave singularly
> unimpressive results in the hands of Phil Askey at dpreview.com, there
> is some reason for caution on this point.

Perhaps, but a brief perusal of some of the before/after shots posted in
the Pentax SLR forum for both the K100D amd K10 should quickly erase
those doubts.  There are some stunning images at 1/2 second and even 1+
second exposues.  Look also for the images shot by janneman on his
riding lawnmower...

---------------
Marc Sabatella
marc@outsideshore.com

Music, art,  & educational materials
Featuring "A Jazz Improvisation Primer"
http://www.outsideshore.com/
frederick - 06 Dec 2006 11:21 GMT
>> Unfortunately, this review doesn't give an account of how _efficient_
>> the SR is in the K10D. Given that the SR in the K100D gave singularly
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> second exposues.  Look also for the images shot by janneman on his
> riding lawnmower...

Shots posted by forum members extolling the virtues of SR are
essentially meaningless.  Even I can sometimes fluke shots handheld at
exposures / focal lengths that shouldn't work.
Anyway, it seems to work in PhilA's test on the a100 quite well, but
poorly on the K100d. His test seems reasonable, but not 100% scientific.
Pentax fans seem to be saying that the test target is too close, yet I
don't see an explanation of why this could make a difference.
Marc Sabatella - 06 Dec 2006 17:38 GMT
> Shots posted by forum members extolling the virtues of SR are
> essentially meaningless.  Even I can sometimes fluke shots handheld at
> exposures / focal lengths that shouldn't work.

I agree you can't read too much into one or two examples.  But it's
tough to ignore the sheet number of such posts.  Keep in mind that
*many* people tested the SR system on the K100D fairly extensively
practically first thing out of the box, because it as the thing they
were most curious about (just as we see a plethora of posts from new
K10D owners testing the ISO 1600 performance, since *that* is what
everyone is most curious about there).  So I think it fair to assume
that many of the posts you see there are not from people posting their
one fluke shot, but from people who really sat down and did some
testing.  In many cases, the post itself makes this clear.  Also,
considering how quick people are to complain about, say, perceived
underexposure issues, I would say the overwhelming amount of data in
support of the SR system seems signifcant - eg, if there were something
to complain about, people *would* be complaining.

Oh, and FWIW, it is my perception that most of the underexposure
complaints come from people new to DSLR's who expect their camera to
behave like their P&S - to try to "guess" what exposure you might
aesthetically prefer, rather than carefully calculating an exposure
designed to preserve the maximum of amount of detail.  In particular,
many P&S cameras will automatically expose a backlit scene for the
foreground and hence overexpose the background, or will happily ignore
and hence overexpose a bright reflection in a scene in order to render
the rest of it in a pleasing way.  Some DSLR's may do the the same, but
the Pentax ones decidedly don't.  Don't get me wrong - they do have an
intelligent multi-segment metering system - but it seems it chooses to
interpret this data somewhat conservatively in terms of deciding how
much highlight detail it can afford to lose.

---------------
Marc Sabatella
marc@outsideshore.com

Music, art,  & educational materials
Featuring "A Jazz Improvisation Primer"
http://www.outsideshore.com/
frederick - 06 Dec 2006 21:53 GMT
>> Shots posted by forum members extolling the virtues of SR are
>> essentially meaningless.  Even I can sometimes fluke shots handheld at
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> support of the SR system seems signifcant - eg, if there were something
> to complain about, people *would* be complaining.

Okay - if that is correct (and it could be - I don't know), then what
does Phil Askey have to say about it?
If there was a specific problem with the camera that he tested (which if
your argument is correct, could be possible), then I expect that he'd
retest or point out that a faulty camera may have been involved in the
result.  Perhaps he'll retest when he tests the K10d?

As far as iso 1600 noise goes, as usual mostly people compare jpegs, and
argue about how much detail is lost by in camera NR etc.  Shooting raw
is the only way to go IMO when pushing things - whether it's colour
balance, tough exposure conditions, or situations where high ISO is
needed. It's so much better to apply NR in PP - when you know what
you're doing with the image (printing, to what size etc) than letting
the camera do it, or even worse, farting around with buttons to set
options for different in-camera NR settings when you should be taking
photos.

> Oh, and FWIW, it is my perception that most of the underexposure
> complaints come from people new to DSLR's who expect their camera to
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> interpret this data somewhat conservatively in terms of deciding how
> much highlight detail it can afford to lose.

Sure.  I hadn't seen the underexposure complaints about the K10d.  I use
a D70 - and the similar complaints about underexposure also seem endless
and misinformed.  Nikon apparently reacted to this with the D80, or
perhaps just figured that there would be less whining from users who
knew to set EV when needed, and just make it work like a P&S camera for
the rest who probably shoot jpegs all the time.  Probably another reason
to go the way that they did was also from all the whining and forum
comparisons about noise - from people who put far too much emphasis on
this because pixel peeping it is far more visible than it ever is in
print, so seems like a much bigger deal than it is. Lightening a
slightly underexposed shot is the best way to accentuate noise.  A
camera that slightly overexposes (compared with what I  prefer) is going
to be thought less noisy.  Just my opinion, but a little noise detracts
far less than blown highlights in a print.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.