Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 2, 2006, 6:06 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 56
Default

Hi there,

Currently own a Canon S2 IS which my wife is quite happy with for point and shoot, I like playing with the manual controls and using the more advanced functions, so I'm looking at upgrading to a DSLR. I'd love to have image stabilisation at sensor if possible so that i can attach older lens etc, and I've found the IS on my canon to be pretty good. This brings to me to be looking at the Pentax K100D and the Sony Alpha 100D. From what i can tell both cameras look to be pretty decent entry level units, with IS on the sensor, and the main differences that I saw were the Sony is 10Mp, vs Pentax 6Mp, Sony uses proprietry Li-Ion battery vs. Pentax AAs and Sony uses Compact Flash vs. SD for Pentax. Battery wise i prefer AAs, and from what i understand, because the actual sensor size on both cameras is the same, the extra megapixels are somewhat irrelevant? Correct me on this if it's not the case. Other than that, the Pentax seems a lot cheaper, the 2 deals i was looking at with the K100D were Camera body + 18-125mm Sigma lens for $985 AU, or camera body + 18-50mm Sigma and 55-200mm Sigmas lens for $1160 AU. Is the 18-125mm lens a better option for every day use as it has a larger zoom range, or am I better going for the twin lens kit and switching out as needed?

Finally, are there any major features of the Sony vs. Pentax that should make me look either way more?

thanks.
Tim.
shadow-wolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 2, 2006, 6:48 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 183
Default

Li-Ion batteries, in most all cases, will give you much greater battery life than AA's. Forget alkaline AA's, you'll need a good set of NiMh rechargeable for most digicams (2500 mAh or better) to get decent results. If you were leaning toward AA's thinking you could get by without needing a charger it's just not economical. Today's CF cards can save at speeds , again in most all cases, faster than SD cards. This cuts down your write time, especially in burst mode.Both haveIS (image stabilization) for blur-free handheld shots.The Sony hasit's own form of dust-reduction (the only manufacturer other than Olympus to address this very real problem).

Pentax relies on a proven reputation and, in my opinion, a more complete system as of today (lenses, flashes, other accessories). The Sony can use it's own lenses or ones from the now defunct Konica-Minolta system. Given that KM won't be making anything new it's up to Sony to build from here...somehting you'd naturally expect but cannot guarantee.


stowaway7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2006, 8:34 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 56
Default

Regarding batteries, I currently use PowerEx/Maha 2500 NiMH batteries and have a decent charger so that's not a big issue, i certainly have no illusions about using non-rechargable AAs, i just find it a bit easier to have that option of grabbing some AAs if i got stuck somewhere without my charger and really needed to take a few shots, but I guess grabbing a spare Li-Ion or 2 would solve that problem.

A big question is whether the Sony unit is worth the extra expense, as it seems it will cost me about $700 AU more than the Pentax.
shadow-wolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2006, 9:36 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
tmoreau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 477
Default

Your not really worried about number of pixels (megapixels) unless your printing something like 18x24" or bigger, but should be concerned with pixel size. In this case, same size sensor with more pixels makes them smaller. 10mp *could* be a downgrade from 6mp in many ways, but realisticly there are so many real-world details its hard to judge generally like that. At any rate, they'll both give you about the same results except 1) in dim light (win: bigger pixels) or 2) at very large print sizes (win: more pixels). Between these two, I wouldnt stress over the sensor much. 10mp files will be bigger though, so thats going to cost you.

AA batteries are nice and convienent, standard, etc, but they dont last as long as proprietary li-ion batteries. You basicly can NOT use alkaline batteries anyway (they die VERY quickly) so you'll be using rechargables. Its not such a big issue, you'll be carrying spares and chargers on vacation either way.

There are loads of minolta lenses out there, and sigma and tamron (maybe tokina) will continue making compatible lenses. Sony's lineup should continue to expand, too.
tmoreau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2006, 9:59 AM   #5
Member
 
SelrahCharleS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 72
Default

Just recently found this on megapixels and print size http://www.bhphotovideo.com/FrameWor...hartPopup.html so the megapixels should not matter to you unless you crop. The Pentax works well with older lenses that can be bought cheaply, I'm not sure how the sony does in that respect.
SelrahCharleS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2006, 10:57 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

If you have been following the KM/Sony DSLR folder, there have been some very mixed feelings about the new Sony A100 Alpha. Actual pixel size was reduced measurably when Sony crammed 10mp into the same APS-C CMOS imager. While the KM 5D and 7D could go to ISO 3200 with their 6mp CMOS imager, the Sony A-100 stops at ISO 1600, apparently due to the noise issue.

In addition, the Sony A-100 in an effort to achieve beter dynamic range has their in-camera firmware adjusted so that .jpg images come out pretty flat. The noise signature of the Sony A-100 is different, showing more noise, than the KM 5D and 7D.

On the other hand the Pentax K100D is supposed to have better in-camera processing for .jpg images and a low noise signature that is similiar to the DS, but slightly better. User reports over at the Pentax DSLR forum on dpreview seem to indicate that the AS (anti-shake) seems to work well.

We will certainly know more when we see the first professional reviews.

MT
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2006, 11:09 AM   #7
Member
 
EdGallagher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 59
Default

erm - I wouldn't quite believe half the things people are saying in attempting to poo poo the A-100. Most of it is coming from the viewpoint of A-100 says SONY and not Konica Minolta - and that is pretty much it. As for ISO 1600 and 3200 - how many people will actually use these as a regular occurance, I would say a conservative estimate would be about 1 in 100 - and how many people would turn on the flash and use a better ISO - about 99 in 100 :|
EdGallagher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2006, 12:38 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Ed-

Why then, aren't you out the door and on your way to the local camera shop to purchase a Sony A-100? Quite honestly, if you want to support this new camera, how about providing some valid reasoning or, even better, some photo samples.

MT
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2006, 4:56 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Here are some photos from the Pentax K100D. The AS really does work well and the new .jpg processing is impressive, as is the "auto ISO" selection, the new finish, and the low noise signature.

Here is the new Mode Selector showing that the "Auto Pict" mode has been retained and new Scene Modes have been added.



Here is a photo of the right hand side of the K-100D showing the new pebble finish on the front, and the newly designed SD Card Door.



Here is a photo of the Camera Back on the K100D



The K100D is easy to handle and fulfills its promises.

MT
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2006, 10:19 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
monx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 107
Default

EdGallagher wrote:
Quote:
erm - I wouldn't quite believe half the things people are saying in attempting to poo poo the A-100. Most of it is coming from the viewpoint of A-100 says SONY and not Konica Minolta - and that is pretty much it. As for ISO 1600 and 3200 - how many people will actually use these as a regular occurance, I would say a conservative estimate would be about 1 in 100 - and how many people would turn on the flash and use a better ISO - about 99 in 100 :|
i will........................

indoor sports.-

clubbing.-

Both of these venues are were i feel 1600 iso is just not enough. I would love to have iso3200 ( even 6400 If possible ) on my nikon d50.

MORE ISO SENSITIVITY WITH LOW NOISE! LESS Mpixels PLZ!:-)
monx is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 11:19 PM.