K100D Super vs K200D

[airconvent]

May be I can recommend some of my friends to take up a DSLR now

If stablised CCD not an issue, the old istDL is a good choice. Its very light and small and I owned it as my first DSLR. I would presume a second hand one with kit lens should be around $400-$500 these days assuming you can find someone willing to sell it.
I sold mine to a gentleman in Toa payoh sometime back and it may be time for him to upgrade...I suspect alot of people are keeping their istDL or DS at home because they think no one wants them as all salivating over the K100D super, K200D and K20D...:bsmilie:

 

[night86mare]

This Pentax will be my PnS with the DA35 for every weekend. I got another camera, big, nice, fast, fantastic noise control, weather sealing so and so, but so heavy can kill too. :sweatsm:

:sweat:

that is the k20d right.. :bsmilie:

 

[longko]

mm...:think: The noise arose from squeezing too many pixels onto the same area and having the pixels smaller. This makes s/n ratio bad. If you set to 6MP on the 10MP K200D, you are merely telling the camera to process the smaller centre part of the CCD up to 6MP. The pixel density remains the same, hence noise performance should be the same. This is the same trick used on P&S cameras..at least that's what I read.

The thread starter wants it in RAW not JPEG^^;

Anyway here are the raws and resized/cropped with PS3. Setting ISO1600 f8 0.5s set WB based on the white backdrop in warm room light. Taken with FA 35-70mm macro

K100D cropped

K10D resized to 6MP then cropped

Edit: AF might be a bit off, but you should be able to tell the noise lvl. K200D should have similar (if not same) sensor as K10D.

 

[Parchiao]

:sweat:

that is the k20d right.. :bsmilie:

no lah, another brand.

 

[Parchiao]

The thread starter wants it in RAW not JPEG^^;

Anyway here are the raws and resized/cropped with PS3. Setting ISO1600 f8 0.5s set WB based on the white backdrop in warm room light. Taken with FA 35-70mm macro

Thank you bro, this is a very very good comparision. :thumbsup: In my eyes, the K100D is doing only marginally better if we compare the area around the holes, else it's almost the same.

 

[longko]

Thank you bro, this is a very very good comparision. :thumbsup: In my eyes, the K100D is doing only marginally better if we compare the area around the holes, else it's almost the same.

Gald you got ur answer. Lucky still have K100D with me, else can't really do much for u. But K20D noise lvl does have much better noise control. Also the reason why I got it^^

 

[night86mare]

note that this is k10d

according to various forum reports i have seen, it seems that k200d noise reduction is at least a little bit better too. that's what they say anyways, haven't seen proper comparisons with 100% crop, etc.

 

[timo]

mm...:think: The noise arose from squeezing too many pixels onto the same area and having the pixels smaller. This makes s/n ratio bad. If you set to 6MP on the 10MP K200D, you are merely telling the camera to process the smaller centre part of the CCD up to 6MP. The pixel density remains the same, hence noise performance should be the same. This is the same trick used on P&S cameras..at least that's what I read.

Don't think that's true. If the camera did that, it would be cropping the image, which it doesn't do. I think the camera downsizes the file like photoshop does before writing to the card - opposite of interpolation (don't know the word). And downsizing a K10D high-ISO shot to 6MP does get you quite close to the noise levels of the K100D - I've tried it. Comparing 100% crops is kind of meaningless - what matters is a comparison at a particular print size, or the same size on screen.

Cheers,

Tim