Pentax K Series - First Year Opinions

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

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.)

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

No, they don't. The 1DmkIII sensor is a new technology that claims 5D noise
levels with the smaller 1DsII size pixels, and also claims 14-bit A/D
conversion.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

Getting back to the K10D JPGs, I've read numerous posts on forums that
say that the JPGs are fine, and that if one wants a JPG closer to the
slightly sharper and clearer JPG that they're used to they just need to
use the Bright setting. Others are saying that's not quite so, that it
doesn't really give you that. I'm interested in opinions either way.?

I wish I had tried it to see when I had one for a borrowed hour, because
I tried in vain to get a JPG that was pleasing to me using the other
settings (sharpness, saturation and contrast). i wasn't trying to
Photoshop it in the camera, but I was trying to get a JPG that I felt
good about handing off to someone as is.

I would love to hear from someone who was unhappy at first but found an
eventual setting that worked for them, as opposed to the Canonikon
haters who thought the JPGs were great from the start : ) Not
doubting you, but I won't be swayed by explanations of why what I don't
like I actually should like. : ) (Please note big smiley!)


I really want to get over this last bee in my bonnet so I can just get
it with confidence.


Thanks!!

M

Getting back to the K10D, I'd like to get some opinions about the
Bright mode. Some are saying that it takes care of the JPGs not
being presentable "as is", others are disagreeing. I know that when
I had a borrowed one for an hour, I was unable to get JPGs I was
satisfied with by trying different combinations of the sharpness,
contrast and saturation settings. I felt it wasn't solving what I
didn't like about the images, particularly the edges, but I wasn't hip
to the Bright mode at the time. Naturally the short time I had it in
my hands wasn't long enough to be certain of my conclusion, plus it
was months ago, before much of the feedback on this topic I'm finding
now was posted. So I'm hoping someone who had a similar mindset
about it and is satisfied with the solution will chime in. I've
seen how good the RAWs come out, so I have no doubts about image
quality there (which is obviously more important). But there are
definitely times I still want to hand off the images as is, to someone
who doesn't work with RAW.


I really want to lose my trepidations about this camera, so I'd
appreciate any thoughts either way on this.

Thanks,

TB

On Apr 26, 1:06 pm, monsells wrote:
Getting back to the K10D JPGs, I've read numerous posts on forums that


Sorry for the double post of this via a different account. I kernel
panicked after sending this and it didn't seem to ever show up, so I
sent another (from different computer, different account) saying the
same thing. Thought the monsells post never went out.

Same person. Can't seem to delete either. My bad. Sorry : o

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?

- 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



I got a K100D for Christmas. I love it, but I am still in the process
of relearning a lot of photo basics I haven't used for a long time...
The Pentax replaces a Canon A80 P&S which took decent pictures when used
the right way, and both my wife and I had used Pentax 35mm models before
the digitals came about. I have a K100, hers is an ME, with a nice
70-200 zoom and a fixed 135 telephoto.

Overall quality - I find only one thing that is noticeable, the fit of
the battery compartment cover plate. Just a tiny bit loose and can be
noticed when holding the camera in normal shooting position.

Operating ease - Not bad, but I have no basis for comparison with other
DSLRs. Menus weren't too bad to figure out. Manual could have been
better, but that is true of just about any complex electronic item nowadays.

Picture quality - camera is capable of exceeding my current skill level.
Any faults in my pictures are *my* faults.

K-Mount - this is the best thing about the camera for me. I have the
ability to use the old 135 and 70-200 lenses just as on the old bodies.
Both lenses are old enough that there is no auto-anything on 'em, but
that just gives me the opportunity to relearn the basics of shooting 100
percent manual settings... :-\

No processing quirks I've noticed, but I just do basic cropping and
touchups.

HAPPY!

Jim

Hey thanks. I have been lusting over the K10D but I really think the K100
is enough. I, like you, have old Pentax bodies and lenses that are driving
me toward a Pentax buy. Plus I have been very happy with the old KX and
K1000s that I still use. I also own a couple of the late 70's/early 80's
vintage Series I vivitars that are very good lenses (70-210 and f1.9 28mm)

RonB

"J. F. Cornwall" wrote in message
...
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?

- 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

I got a K100D for Christmas. I love it, but I am still in the process of
relearning a lot of photo basics I haven't used for a long time...
The Pentax replaces a Canon A80 P&S which took decent pictures when used
the right way, and both my wife and I had used Pentax 35mm models before
the digitals came about. I have a K100, hers is an ME, with a nice 70-200
zoom and a fixed 135 telephoto.

Overall quality - I find only one thing that is noticeable, the fit of the
battery compartment cover plate. Just a tiny bit loose and can be noticed
when holding the camera in normal shooting position.

Operating ease - Not bad, but I have no basis for comparison with other
DSLRs. Menus weren't too bad to figure out. Manual could have been
better, but that is true of just about any complex electronic item
nowadays.

Picture quality - camera is capable of exceeding my current skill level.
Any faults in my pictures are *my* faults.

K-Mount - this is the best thing about the camera for me. I have the
ability to use the old 135 and 70-200 lenses just as on the old bodies.
Both lenses are old enough that there is no auto-anything on 'em, but that
just gives me the opportunity to relearn the basics of shooting 100
percent manual settings... :-\

No processing quirks I've noticed, but I just do basic cropping and
touchups.

HAPPY!

Jim

RonB wrote:

Hey thanks. I have been lusting over the K10D but I really think the K100
is enough. I, like you, have old Pentax bodies and lenses that are driving
me toward a Pentax buy. Plus I have been very happy with the old KX and
K1000s that I still use. I also own a couple of the late 70's/early 80's
vintage Series I vivitars that are very good lenses (70-210 and f1.9 28mm)

I prefer the AA batteries used in the K100d. When I get some time I'd
like to run resolution tests on a bunch of old glass. I was thinking of
a large piece of graph paper for the background with assorted small
pictures and decals spread out over it.




mike

"RonB" wrote in message
...
Hey thanks. I have been lusting over the K10D but I really think the K100
is enough. I, like you, have old Pentax bodies and lenses that are
driving me toward a Pentax buy. Plus I have been very happy with the old
KX and K1000s that I still use. I also own a couple of the late 70's/early
80's vintage Series I vivitars that are very good lenses (70-210 and f1.9
28mm)

RonB


I've had my K100D for 7 months now and it can really do the business
quality-wise, even in jpg but you do have to learn its little foibles. The
very best quality will require RAW and Silkypix converter plus a good lens,
but good lenses include £35 ebay goodies like a 50mm A f1.7 I picked up and
there's a free Silkypix version that covers the bare essentials. Manual
focus is fairly easy with practice using a bright old lens because you get
a nice smooth long throw focus ring and the AF confirmation light still
flashes and is correct plus the viewfinder is decent. Prime lenses get
image stabilisation, so you're suddenly in a different league for low
natural light photos at lowish cost.

Jpgs are fine, but I prefer to keep the contrast and sharpening right down,
saturation 0, and give each picture some sharpening afterwards with a mix of
large radius contrast boost and small radius edge enhancement, it just looks
so much better that way but that's the same with most cameras that haven't
over processed (and usually ruined IMHO) the jpgs. If not post processing I
would use Saturation 0, Sharpening +1, Contrast -1 and exposure
compensation -0.3EV.

Problems?

Having to be aware that the Auto WB doesn't cover a wide range so it won't
de-yellow tungsten lighting, so manual WB or the fixed tungsten WB or RAW
are the order of the day for tungsten lighting. AWB works well in daylight,
bright or shaded but it's best to use the fixed WB settings. Cloudy and
Daylight cover most situations. People have complained about the WB not
automatically going to flash WB when the flash is raised, but colours seem
fine to me with flash if the camera is left in Cloudy WB which also works
very well indoors anyway with dull natural lighting, so that saves having to
fiddle with WB settings if taking a mix of flash and non flash shots.

The battery compartment is bound to wobble slightly if you look at it's
sprung loaded design, but it looks strong enough with metal hinges and
several catches, it's never caused any real problems for me, perhaps they
could have put a stronger spring in. The camera overall is very well made,
with a solid feel to it.

No focus assist light unless you buy a flash. The internal flash works when
raised as a focus assist light and works OK at short distances but is
annoying and only comes on when it wants to i.e. when it's dark, it can't be
forced on. Low light auto focusing is OK though but not quick and you
definitely need to aim at something with some contrast. With a bit of light
and a good lens it's fast enough though and always accurate bit it's a bit
noisy.

SR works well especially at distance, not perfect but a definite aid to not
losing shots. It's not so much help for macro but Pentax admit that, it's
obvious really when the system works by correcting for angular camera
movements and yet with macro the main 'shake' is caused by translational
movement (up/down/left/right) relative to the subject, not angular movement.

Conclusion?
It's a great camera if you take the time to learn it.