Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 15, 2006, 4:04 AM   #21
Senior Member
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788

Hello again guys; :-)

I am rather concerned about the K100D's high ISO performance because when everI take a look at the review of the Samsung GX-1S (The PentaxIST DS2 equivalent); I noticed that the ISO 1600 shotstart to loose image details and it was also claimed by the reviewer himself. I will be using the ISO 1600 often if I shoot indoor actions so this is very important (Sadly if I have to abandon Pentax dSLRs), unless the K100D is better to the extend of the Nikon D50 or Canon EOS 350D dSLRs.

However, looking by the way things are; the Pentax K100D seems to be the more perfect dSLR over the D50 and EOS 350D IMO (Which have a lot of flaws)(The K100D also have build in image stabilizer). But I am just concerned about the ISO 1600...Take a look at this link of the GX-1S review and take a look at the ISO test below>>> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sa...x_gx1s-review/Also read what the reviewer says. (I guess they are professionals and would know what they are talking about).

Regards. So far I am very happy with the K100D after knowing more about it and Pentax lenses are as interesting too. (IMO I hate the looks and quality of Canon lenses and don't expect me to afford the L glasses). Nikon lenses are also interesting and neat.

All in all, if we compare lenses from Nikon, Pentax, and Canon; we will see that similar lenses from Nikon and Pentax are nicer & neater in construction, better in optical quality, better build quality, and better price.

Take a look at a few examples below which IMO justify what I said>>>

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...5_18/index.htmThis is the nice and refined Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.8 D. It doesn't pose the purple fringing problems of Canon's equivalent. (Just take a look at it's samples)

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...5_18/index.htmThis is the Canon's version of the Nikkor 85 mm F/1.8 D. It looks dated and scratchy compared to the sleek and crisp outlook of the Nikkors'. The lens also have problems with purple fringing; something you just won't find on the Nikkor 85 mm F1.8. Both are great at imagesharpnessthough the Nikkor one is cheaper at 300 USD today, and doesn't have all the problems.

Another one is the Nikkor AF 50mm f/1.4 D; This is a pretty old lens but it's design looks centuries ahead of the Canon's version IMO. The lens is also priced cheaper and performs just the same as the Canon one. Would you pay more for the same type of 50 mm F/1.4 opticalquality with the more scratchy/primitive looking design of the Canons'? Not me.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...0_14/index.htmThis is theCanon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM with an optionalfilter.

The Pentax 50mm f/1.4 SMC P-FA is only priced at $220 and looks levels better IMO (The build also looks better). You get 50 mm with F/1.4 for just 220 USDs compared to the ridiculous 300 USDs for the Canon version. Canon cameras and lensesare ridiculously overpriced IMO, you can get lenses with similar or better performance from other manufacturers for less $$$$.

Coming to think about it, I think Canon is cheating our bucks. That applies to their dSLRs as well.

Look at how stingy are they with the EOS 350D? They made it so plastic, give it a small & low res 115,000 pixel 1.8" LCD with less back light, small Pentamirror viewfinder, and shaky flash unit etc...All this cost cuttingmethod that reduces quality. The camera isalsomore expensive than the Nikon D50 that has a much better design and quality. Furthermore, Nikon lenses are better constructed and value for money than Canon lenses.

You see, Nikon did not compromise quality on their Nikkor AF 50mm f/1.8 D http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...0_18/index.htm. It still has the quality and metal mount when compared to the more expensive F/1.4 version http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...0_14/index.htm.Canon on the other hand, fully crippled their Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II when compared to it's more expensive F/1.4 variantbygiving ita plastic mount and crappy plastic design. http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...uct/150/cat/10

As for Pentax, thankfully they are like Nikon. They don't compromise quality just because it is in the lower end. :roll:For Canon, you can clearly differentiate the lower end from the higher end; eg. the EOS-350Dvs the EOS-20D and the 50mm F1.8 version vs the 50mm F1.4 version (prime lens) and etc...

But if you take a look at Nikon for example, you don't see the D50 compromising in quality compared to the D70s (Less features but quality is still there). And the Nikkor 50mm F1.8 vs the Nikkor 50mm F1.4 as well, you just don't see quality compromises in there. Pentax is the same thing as far as I can see, and that is the correct way to attract customers like me. (Not try to cut here cut there and try to save cost). Canon's lower offerings are clearly low cost standards whereabout on Nikon and Pentax, you still get quality products. (Perhaps on all the other companies as well). (Just compare thekit lens that comes with the EOS-350D to the other kit lenses...how awful)

BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2006, 9:20 AM   #22
Senior Member
TDN's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,288

Dont worry about the high ISO performance Benjamin, my Pentax DL produces the best High ISO images I've ever seen. The in-camera noise reduction is excellent.

I think the K100D uses the same system.

btw: 1600 isnt your limit with a Pentax, they go up to 3200 ISO, which is not useless at all, like dpreview describes it.

TDN is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:32 AM.