Official Photographer's Thread
03-Apr-2007, 03:18 PM
#942
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Newmarket
Posts: 2,867
05-Apr-2007, 08:50 AM
#944
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Photographer's Corner
Posts: 13,424
hey...anybody using the Pentax K100D or K110D DSLR camera over here? i was just reading some reviews on dpreview and everybody says...two thumbs up. Ive owned Pentax regular diggies in the past but i am totally unaware as to how good or bad these DSLRs are.
16-Apr-2007, 02:16 AM
#951
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North York
Posts: 2,254
Originally posted by szuberi
hey...anybody using the Pentax K100D or K110D DSLR camera over here? i was just reading some reviews on dpreview and everybody says...two thumbs up. Ive owned Pentax regular diggies in the past but i am totally unaware as to how good or bad these DSLRs are.
hey...anybody using the Pentax K100D or K110D DSLR camera over here? i was just reading some reviews on dpreview and everybody says...two thumbs up. Ive owned Pentax regular diggies in the past but i am totally unaware as to how good or bad these DSLRs are.
i really like the pentax... my only other point of comparision is a few regular p&s cameras i've used and my first ever slr the pentax k1000.
heres a few pics taken with the pentax k100d.
16-Apr-2007, 04:57 PM
#953
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Streetsville/ Hamilton
Posts: 2,877
Pentax makes some good stuff. I have a 35mm Pentax somewhere and it served me well.
I think my next camera will be an Olympus E-510. Built in IS, 10MP and Live Preview. Despite this, body isn't that expensive but the lenses are insanely expensive though. 3000 for a 70-200 equivalent.
I think my next camera will be an Olympus E-510. Built in IS, 10MP and Live Preview. Despite this, body isn't that expensive but the lenses are insanely expensive though. 3000 for a 70-200 equivalent.
16-Apr-2007, 06:48 PM
#955
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 23,881
ummm...u can no doubt get a cheaper lens for that camera...but the lenses in general arent cheap...which in the end is gonna limit what u can do since u wont be able to afford anything for the camera...I'd stay away from olympus just because there is next to nothing easily available for them
16-Apr-2007, 07:33 PM
#956
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Streetsville/ Hamilton
Posts: 2,877
Not really Matt.
Leica, Olympus Panasonic and Sigma have an open standard amongst them called 4/3rds. Basically I could get a lens from any one of these manufacturers and put it on my camera. It would work no problem. I can get anything Olympus (current P&S is Oly) at Henry's so I dunno what you mean about availability. Lastly, Oly like all other manufacturers has split up their lens range into different grades. The 70-200 is part of the super high quality range of lenses, thus it costs a lot. Their other lenses are much more affordable.
Leica, Olympus Panasonic and Sigma have an open standard amongst them called 4/3rds. Basically I could get a lens from any one of these manufacturers and put it on my camera. It would work no problem. I can get anything Olympus (current P&S is Oly) at Henry's so I dunno what you mean about availability. Lastly, Oly like all other manufacturers has split up their lens range into different grades. The 70-200 is part of the super high quality range of lenses, thus it costs a lot. Their other lenses are much more affordable.
16-Apr-2007, 07:46 PM
#958
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 23,881
well most olympus branded lenses are more expensive than nikon branded/canon branded etc...when does that 510 even come out?...the camera sounds pretty gimmicky to be honest after looking over it on the site..like only 3-point auto focus, thats pretty lame just makes composing pictures take a bit longer...but I guess with everything bumping up to prosumer MP standards these days its a starting point...its light as hell tho haha...half the weight of my d200
...after using my Nikon D200 for the past few months, lower ended units just dont do it for me...too much clutter and gimmicks...but I'm sure it will do you well
...after using my Nikon D200 for the past few months, lower ended units just dont do it for me...too much clutter and gimmicks...but I'm sure it will do you well
16-Apr-2007, 08:07 PM
#959
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Streetsville/ Hamilton
Posts: 2,877
The 510 is supposed to be released around June or July (right around my birthday time, SCORE!). I'm leaning towards Oly because of the in-camera IS and the sick nature of Olympus' lenses. I prefer to shoot available light so having a usable and sharp f 2.0 tele is just sick. You might have a point with AF though, i didn't realize it's just three points. But then again I don't think it could be that bad cause Nikon has the D40 and it has like 3 or 4 AF points I think. The main thing I'm worried about is noise. The previous models were horrible above ISO 400, I hope this area is vastly improved otherwise it might be the deal breaker for me.
16-Apr-2007, 08:19 PM
#960
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 23,881
well remember a couple things...at low f-stops your depth of field is shallow and remember the d40 is the lowest camera in the lineup and the d40x is just stupid in my books...wow, a bigger sensor and no other upgrades...and in all reality even at a low f-stop ur gonna still need to be shooting at a relativly high iso in low light...internal IS is a nice thing to have but I'd rather have VR in the lens...I'd rather replace a lens then a camera ya know what I mean?
but in the end all this modern technology is making things so complicated and easy compared to what people still use as industry standards
but in the end all this modern technology is making things so complicated and easy compared to what people still use as industry standards
