Alex, My wife has a K100 and I have a K10, so I have a little experience with both. There were several things I was looking for in a DSLR that the K100 doesn't offer. SSM and weather sealing being the two big ones. I've also had problems focusing manual lenses on the K100. It's much better on the K10. Ergonomics was the other biggie. On several occasions I found myself shooting pretty much continuously for an hour or two with the K100. My right hand cramped something awful. The camera was just too small to be comfortable. (I'm 6 feet and a bit overweight, but otherwise have an average build, and that includes my hands.) I've not had this sort of discomfort using the PZ-1, MX, K1000, or Spotmatic. The *ist film body was uncomfortable until I put the battery grip on it. I'm able to use the K10 for extended periods without any problems.
I would think either K body would be an improvement over the DL, though I've never used a DL so I can't comment on the ergonomics. If it's convenient, you should try to handle both bodies before purchase. Of course, there are other differences, but I'll leave that to the resident digital experts. HTH. -- Scott Loveless www.twosixteen.com/ -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: AlexG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hi guys, > > I have been quite annoyed at all the low-light shots that I had to > delete because of slight camera shake. While I'd love to have the use > of a tripod, I A- Don't have one and B- wouldn't bring it with me if I > did, so I've decided that shake reduction is a feature worth having. > > Also the JPEGs out of the DL are only satisfactory under very specific > conditions. The k100d and k10d are both much better from what I've > seen. > > I currently have an *ist DL, with 18-55 and 50-200 lenses. My M42 > 50mm/1.4 is currently sitting on ebay, because I suck at focusing when > the light is low. > > Anyway, I am in a bit of a pickle. I am hesitating between k100d and > k10d, the former being about half the cost of the k10d makes it > extremely attractive right now. > > Here are the advantages of each, as I see them. > > K100d: > CHEAP!! > Lower noise > Up to iso3200 > Better dynamic range than k10d (as measured in raw by Imaging-Resource) > AA Batteries > > K10d: > 10MP makes for an extra 800x600 of breathing room when cropping > Pentaprism viewfinder > SSD/SSM/USM in-lens focus compatibility (==future-proof) > Excellent firmware (customizable white balance presets, mtf priority, > adjustable autoiso range, hyperprogram, etc) > > Plan is to sell the DL, body-only for 250-300 on ebay, as it is almost > new (2100 pics vs the 17000 that seems to be the norm here :) ) > > I will get the FA50/1.4 at the time of purchase. > > I have been concerned about the k10d's image quality, both from a > noise and 'banding' perspective. Proprietary li-ion batteries piss me > off because they cost so much to replace. > > But the pentaprism looks gooooooooooood. As do some of the pictures > I've seen. And SSM seems to be the proper solution to the pentax SLR > slow autofocus syndrome, though this has yet to be verified. The > lenses (DA*) seem to be very nice, and quite fast compared to the > current DA zooms so they'd be nice to upgrade to. > > If I get the k100d, i can get SR RIGHT NOW and worry about a > super-high-end camera in a year's time when the k10d's successor comes > out. > > Anyway, I am thoroughly confused and I apologize for being a windbag > in this thread. I realize this has probably been debated ad nausea, > but I need some help to push me off the fence in either direction. > > Alex > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
