Pentax's
K-m (or
K2000, as it were) may be geared towards beginners, but that's not to say it's lacking in the performance department. The DSLR was recently apprehended and tested at
PhotographyBLOG, and apparently they had a really tough time finding anything negative to say. In fact, it was deemed "another excellent addition to Pentax's DSLR range, seamlessly slotting in below the
K200D." With the combination of ease-of-use, mid-range features and a low price, critics found themselves in awe of the value proposition. It was also noted that the small size was appealing to those appalled by bulky high-end cameras, and the image quality is about as good as one could expect for under seven bills (with a lens). Don't take our word for it, though -- tap the read link and check out the drool for yourself.
posted Dec 1st 2008 2:13PM
too bad it's still a Pentax.
spend less money and get a D40 or a 1000D
brand war in 3...2...1...
(i support sony, a200 yay)
Ignorant.
Not really ignorant, just not stated very well. For point and shoots the brand doesn't matter all that much. With SLRs the lenses are far more important than the body. Even with a D3, for example, over the years you'll spend far more on glass than the body, and good glass doesn't go bad. My dad has lenses from the 50s and 60s that he uses all the time.
So having said all that, when purchasing an SLR I would not buy anything other than Canon or Nikon. Personally I prefer Nikon but I can't bash Canon. The ecosystems for these cameras is just so much larger than the other brands.
On the other hand, if you're just looking for a good camera and will probably only ever use the lens that came with the kit, knock yourself out...
I second CraigJ.
For most, I don't think it matters at all which brand you buy. The only people that need to be concerned with the brand "ecosystems" are professionals who actually need and can afford expensive glass and accessories. Whichever brand you choose, there will be more than enough accessories and lenses for amateur photographers and enthusiasts.
Also, a lot of people get caught up on the technical specs of new camera bodies and forget that their camera from two or three years ago can still take pictures just fine. The latest Nikon/Canon offering may have perfect auto-focus, 1000 FPS, a full frame sensor, and brings about the second coming of Christ, but that DSLR from 2005 is still just as good as it ever was. In the end, it's really the photographer behind the camera that determines whether or not a picture is good. Remember, Ansel Adams got along just fine without Live View.
@James: You don't need to be a 'professional' to want alternative lenses. I'm certainly not a professional, but I have two lenses I generally use, and neither are similar to a kit lens. (And two others I don't often use, which again are not much like a kit lens.)
That said, if you definitely aren't going to buy any other lenses for it, but want a larger sensor (higher quality) than a compact, sure a nice small camera like this makes sense. But if there's a possibility you might ever get more interested in photography and want different lenses, I'd get a Nikon or Canon; both manufacturers have pretty good bottom-end models, so it's not like you'd be losing much by making that choice.
Understand I think it's a bit disappointing that this is the situation - in an ideal world there would be a lens standard which all cameras would follow (or a few standards for different sensor sizes), so you'd be free to choose the best lens or camera for your purposes at any time without getting locked into anything. Sadly, I can't see that happening short of some kind of government action to force manufacturers to open their lens standards - which, since clearly neither Nikon nor Canon are monopolies thanks to the presence of the other one, can't happen.
@ Matt...
You have money to buy an 'M" series BMW but no money for a measly Pentax camera?
@Sam:
I think you misread my post. I said, "Whichever brand you choose, there will be more than enough accessories and *lenses* for amateur photographers and enthusiasts." My point was that Nikon and Canon are popular because they offer an overwhelming numbers of options for lenses and accessories, but it's really over-kill for MOST non-professional photogs. Any brand will offer a wide enough selection for amateur photographers, and in the right hands, any modern camera can take a great photo. If you ever decide to go pro, you'll probably need a new system anyways, so future-proofing mostly pointless. Of course, there are always exceptions, but in most cases, picking the right camera shouldn't be about technical specs and upgrade paths.
I'm a Pentax owner and currently own about 15 lenses. About a third of them are manual focus primes from the 70s and 80s. The rest are modern auto focus lenses from the last 10 years. Sometimes, I wish I had a Nikon/Canon so I can have a better AF system, but then I'd be missing out on the wonderful, all metal, DA Limited pancake primes that Pentax offers.
The 10.2MP CCD in the K2000 is also the same ubiquitous Sony sensor in the K200, as well as the Sony Alpha-200, Nikon D40/D60. It comes down to preference in implementation and the camera system. Pentax uses Samsung CMOS on their K20. The fact is, all modern dSLR system are all very good. There really isn't a need for fanboism.
CraigJ: The Pentax lens system is actually why I preferred Pentax over the standard fare brands, at a time when their cameras were seriously lagging behind the competition. Their Limited series primes are some of the most innovative and highest quality autofocus lenses available, and their wide selection of digital lenses dwarf the number offered by other manufactures. Their wide angles lenses are superior to Canon's L series equivalents, especially in the digital format where 35mm lenses don't really have the resolution to match the sensor. They offer the most compact high speed lenses; compare a Pentax 35/2 or 50/1,4, or one of their pancake lenses to the equivalents from the competition; they are great for street photography. Pentax anti-glare coating is probably the best on the market and I think the colors out of the lenses are more pleasant overall, compared to C and N. It is a personal preference and all these systems are great, but Pentax might be considered more of a niche brand offering lots of small, bright prime lenses to purists for a great value. Heck, I can even use lenses from 50 years ago with no problem!
This talk about lenses being the deciding factor, and therefore Nicon/Canon 8automatically* "winning" is ludicrous and uninformed. Unlike some other brands, a Pentax body will take lenses going back many, many years, and will fit many different brands of glass. After much research, I chose Pentax because of the easy and cheap access to a huge variety of high quality glass.
I have a digital camera on my cell phone and I don't get what everyone is raving about. The pictures are always kinda fuzzy. If this camera is digital as well, then it's probably not worth it...
are u trying to be funny?
I'll just assume you're joking....
this camera is 2x as expensive as most of the high end cell phones, so the photos probably turn out twice as good.
You are not seriously comparing a cell phone to this are you? If you are. WERE YOU JUST BORN YESTERDAY?
Really? That sounded like anything other than a joke? Who was born yesterday?
Sorry guys, next time I'll put the ' ;-) ' down for even the most obvious of jokes.
Well, after reading iEye and clak making equally inane comments all over the blog, you can see how it's easy to jump to conclusions, right?
I totally found it funny.
But I still low ranked you.
Because I know people like that exist!!
Trust me I have seen it all. There are people who believe something that you pay almost zilch for should work just as good as something someone else paid a lot for. All those people who bout "Vista Capable" computers. You paid less for your computer than my last video card you deserve what you got.
lol@ryan: that's the best logic ever. i cant even come up with anything that compares with the sophistication of your humor
I have one.
It's fantastic.
As someone who did their own B&W art photos in high school, it is a pleasure to use.
I bought a used, 30 year old prime lens on ebay for about $70. This camera communicates with the lens and sets the aperture automatically. No adapters.
Pentax digital cameras are totally under-rated, so it's great to see them getting some attention.
I have a K10D and a K100D, and the K2000 has many of the features of the more expensive models, but in a nice small(er) package. They take great pics, and there are hundreds of lenses you can use with them, and they all benefit from the in-body shake reduction (no need for the more expensive stabilized lenses).
This would be a great travel camera, or one that you wouldn't have to think twice about bringing along.
This looks like a fine deal, but you can snag the comparable and well reviewed Olympus E510 for $50 less with 2 fairly nice lenses on Amazon.
This is a great camera
and I saw one on sale for $530 Canadian
superb value
the d40 is a crippled toy in comparison with no screw drive AF
plus with Pentax you get the bonus of being able to use almost all pentax lenses ever made
even the screw mount ones!
which means a bevy of cheap used yet excellent glass
I owned a K10d for a while and it had major banding issues @ high ISO. Contacted Pentax with sample images and they responded about a month after I submitted the issue on their website through support. They basically told me it wasn't a problem and there would never be a fix. My response is if I wanted to just shoot @ ISO 100 all the time, I could buy a 150 P & S.. :/
If you are artistic at all and use ISO 1600 semi-regularly, I would check reviews thoroughly before hopping on the Pentax train...
Who buys a K10D and shoots ISO1600? Let me know of a camera in that price range that shoots ISO1600 and gives you useable photos? Why would anyone use ISO1600 semi-regularly?
If you shoot night photography then you should know that a DSLR in this range is not gonna cut it anyways. And further more, you should get a hotshoe flash if you are gonna be shooting "artistic" shots in the still of the night.
Get a K20D if you want good high ISO at a decent price or spend gobs more for Canon or Nikon FF DSLRs.
FTA "Just like Pentax's other DSLRs, the shutter release action on the Pentax K-m is quite loud and mechanical, something that you will either love or hate. I liked it, although it isn't great for close-up candid photography as your subject will probably hear you if you get too close."
Isn't "close up candid photography" something that usually runs $19.99/mo online?
@CraigJ You imply, er rather, state fairly explicitly that buying into a Pentax system or any other system besides Canon or Nikon will limit the buyer to the kit lens. In fact, Pentax has quite a good range of primes and zooms. Perhaps not as expansive as Canon, but certainly more than a dedicated amateur or hobbyist could want for. Many of Pentax's primes are stellar for that matter, and that what sold me. I have four primes and two zooms and I don't even own the kit lens.
not what I really meant, but point taken. There are so many more lenses available for Nikon and Canon than any other manufacturer that even as a dedicated amateur I would choose one of those two. Most people buying SLRs fall into two groups. Those that want an SLR, but really have no intention of buying a lot of lenses, and those who want a lens for every conceivable situation. I fall into the latter, even though I only have a few lenses at this point. (my dad shoots canon, and I decided to go nikon, a decision I may regret at some point) I am quite sure I could get good lenses for a Pentax, but I know that not only can I get exactly what I want for my Nikon, I can find it new or used from Nikon and 3 or 4 other manufacturers. Some of the Nikon prime lenses are very, very good, and very affordable as well.
@CraigJ: I'll go one step farther than optigrab: for someone who expects to make a modest investment in a system but wants excellent results (semi-professional or even professional in certain circumstances), Pentax is a great alternative. Their zooms are certainly far fewer in number than Canon's or Nikon's, but then again how many lenses in a given range do you need? And Pentax's hi-quality zooms tend to cost far less than Canon's or Nikon's. And if you're ready to step into primes (and anyone who really wants to explore photography should be), Pentax may even be the better alternative. Primes are where they excel. And they tend to cost less than those of competitive brands. You can accumulate an excellent system with a much smaller investment. What's more, Pentax's current crop of DSLRs are able to use pretty much any K-mount lens Pentax has released in the last 50 years. These days Pentax is an "alternative" brand, but back in the day they were one of the big dogs; this means there's an extensive selection of excellent glass from the 60s, 70s, and 80, some of it very reasonably priced on eBay and in used outlets. They work easily and well with the K100, K10, K20, K200, and K2000.
I'll agree with the commenter who complained about the K10's hi-ISO banding problem. It's a recognized issue, and a disappointing black mark on a camera that's otherwise pretty great. In terms of UI, the K10 was a groundbreaker, and it is indeed a pleasure to shoot with -- and it takes great pictures, as long as you don't push it to high ISOs with regularity. (For that get the K100, Pentax's last implementation of a 6MP sensor, which is as much as most non-pros will ever need anyway. It takes great high-ISO shots. So, reputedly, does the K20D.)
Pros are probably going to want a D300 or better. As yet, Pentax doesn't compete at that level (though the K20 can deliver shots very close in quality to those of the D300, and at half the price). Pros are going to want and need to spend the money for systems like that, too. But for serious amateurs and enthusiasts, Pentax is a worthwhile alternative, with possibly a much better quality-to-price ratio.
Great move by Pentax. I am a firm Pentax supporter admittedly and always recommend it as an alternative to Nikon/Canon . At the entry level, Pentax offers much nicer products - esp the kit lens, which beats the pants off the Nikon/Canon kit lenses. Pentax's mid range cameras are very competitive, as well. Just because they don't have the marketing budget of the big guys does not mean they aren't on par. I'd say Pentax | Cameras .. as .. Subaru | Cars . A solid, just lesser known alternative. Forgive me if my metaphor syntax is off!
Hats off to your Comparison of Pentax to Subaru cars. Both excellent products, less well known than their competitors.
I bought a K10d to use as a carry around instead of my Canon gear I use for events based upon the feature set that Pentax loves to advertise. When you can buy a Panasonic LX3 for 400 bones and get decent ISO 1600 performance, yes I do expect a DSLR that touts weather sealing, IS in the body and plastic shell over metal frame structural integrity to not have checker board banding @ 1600 if the shot is slightly underexposed. Noise I expect. Checkerboard patterns + noise, no.
I got sold on the feature set listed above. If you are just taking shots of grandma and the kids all the time for scrap booking, then it's likely a fine camera. Push the sensor to the limits and IS/sealing/metal frame don't amount to squat if the sensor/firmware isn't up to task.
All I am saying is that at 1600 slightly underexposed, there is or was a serious problem with checkerboard banding. This was shooting basketball in a poorly lit gymnasium, not NBA games. Googling this problem shows I am not the only person this affected and it is or was a real issue. I sold the camera months ago and moved on..I will never give them another dime of my money based on the image output and the extremely slow customer support.
I have a K20D with battery grip 18-55 DA II, 55-300 DA and a 50mm F/2 prime all metal A series lens. Guess what, they all are stabilized. With wireless flash. I got all of that, plus a lowpro computrekkor backpack for just under a grand on eba with MS Cash back. Do that with nikon
All very nice but its at least partially crippled by being a pentax.
A nice camera is not all that useful without a good lens system behind it and Cannon and Nikon run rings around pentax.
So yeah, may be good but buyer beware
Complete ignorance.
The Pentax K-Mount is legendary. Pentax is a tool for photographers and hobbyists, Not Marketing personnel. They have fully supported and provide legacy support for every Single K-Mount and M42 lens since the 60s. Not only that, but they have added in body image stabilization so that my $80 - 85mm F1.9 lens from 1972 gets full image stabilization for up to 3 stops. Let's look at Nikon + Canon's marketing scheme
Release Film Cameras
Release Lenses
Release Digital Cameras
Change Lens mount to make all film lenses incompatible
Re-buy all your lenses for your new dSLR
Release Digital Lenses with built in image stabilization
Re-buy all your lenses with built in image stabilization
-Release a new incremental dSLR every six months
-Re-buy a new dSLR that takes 6.8 fps instead of 4.2 fps.
or
Pentax:
Buy any dSLR we manufacture. Support every lens ever made since the 60s. Image stabilization works for every lens ever made.
The K20D, $730 amazon, can hang with the 50D and D300, which cost almost 2X as much. You can put pentax primes up against anything from Nikon or Canon costing 2X as much. Bank on it.
I kinda liked the Pentax system when I was searching for my first dSLR. But with no local distributor/agent, I didn't want to have to worry about servicing so went with the Canon 450D instead. No regrets though. But the reason some people go with the bigger brands are not necessarily because of better advertising or because of any fanboy-esque religion-membership reason, but rather because of better availability of after-sales service or 2nd-hand lenses/accessories in smaller markets this side of pacific.
Nonetheless, kudos to Pentax. It's always good to have competition. If not, we'll all be sucked into the dark-side that is Nikkon. *wink*