Dilemma

Hi All

I've got a DL2 with 18-55 kit lense.
My dilemma is do i trade it in for a K10D which i would really like to do.
Or do i invest in a better lense for the DL2.
Also does the K10D come with the same standard kit lens as mine as i was
thinking of just getting a body only K10D.

Thanks Richard

You are more likely to see the 16-45mm bundled with the K10D, although I have seen some bundles with the K10D, 18-55mm and 50-200mm.

I haven’t used the 18-55mm only the 16-45 so couldn’t say if the extra cost is justified.

If you don't make prints larger than A4 why not just invest in extra lenses?

The K10D makes better A3 prints without a doubt and also makes cropping more feasible.

The 16-45mm is a better lens than the 18-55mm, but stopped down the latter performs very well indeed anyway. Only upgrade if you need the wider coverage of the 16-45mm or if you need very large prints of the highest quality.

Your DL2 with its 18-55mm is a very sound combination. Why not add a 50-200mm to it?

The standard kit lens is the 18-55, same as the DL, but you do see other options such as the 16-45, or a couple of lenses together.

The K10D is a different beast to the DL all together, if you feel limited by the DL then an upgrade is worth thinking about. I went from the istD to the K10D and the difference in speed was the most marked thing for me, but the images are of a better quality and of course there's the anti-shake too.

Dan

The best way to maximise bang/buck in photography is to really know what you want and why you want it.

The *istDL2 is a fine camera, if you're not blowing shots up to A3 you wont notice the image quality difference going to a K10D. Don't upgrade to a K10D just because it's a "better" camera, figure out why (and indeed IF) your photography needs the extra features in the K10D.

If it turns out you don't need them, why pay for them? get a lens.

If like me you decide that 3FPS for 9 frames (unlimited JPEGS), SR, Sv, TAv and hyper modes with the promise of eventual SDM lens support are worth the extra cash, go for it.

My advice would be to go for better lenses first then consider upgrading the body.

My opinion of the 18-55 seems to differ somewhat from most on here (I was deeply unimpressed by it) however it does cover a useful range so, depending what other lenses you have, I'd be inclined to extent coverage first (i.e. got a 10-20mm, a 50-200mm or perhaps a macro) before thinking about either getting a new body or better/faster lenses in the same range as already covered.

Thanks for the advice
I think that the way things are moving forward then perhaps the K10D is the better option because by the sound of it Pentax have finaly got things right with this one. How does the K10D perform with the 18-55 would it give me a better peformance than on the DL2.
What third party lenses compare with the 16-45 (Tamron,Sigma).

What did they not get right in the DL2?

G

Don't get me wrong the DL2 is a fine camera i would not of bought it if i did'nt think so. It's just that it's served it's apprenticeship and it's time to move on. Pentax with the K10D in my opinion has finaly produced a camera which is now more on par with the canons,nikons etc and hopefully wont get left behind as it has been in the past.

Still Sticking With Pentax

Richard

I believe you, sir, have just commited one of the seven deadly sins of the pentax user forums.

But in all seriousness, the DL2 is a great camera for a nice step up into the DSLR world, if you're not printing things all that large, or cropping and upsizing it's a fine camera.

That being said, I have a first generation DL and I am currently looking to upgrade.

I've had both Canon and Nikon users comment on the quality of images from my DL2, and I've directly compared the results to those from a friends 20D and found the Pentax to be easily on par if not better. My friend agrees and now regrets going Canon. Really, as a K10D user there is nothing wrong with the DL2.

Saying that there are a LOT of things VERY right with the K10D, but I just want to make sure you aren't over estimating the role of the camera body in the process of making great pictures.

The reason my DL2 beats a my friends Canon at 3 times the price is that the 18-55 is a passable lens, whereas the standard Canon kit lens is awful. It's all about the glass on the front.

The K10D is a lovely camera and I can understand why it's tempting, but ask yourself this. Are all your photographic needs met by the 18-55? I'm assuming it's your only lens since you haven't mentioned any others. For the price of a K10D you could have almost any lens in the Pentax lineup. I don't know what you like to shoot but in your position I'd be looking at a 50-200 now and then upgrade the 18-55 to a 16-45 when the 16-50 finally arrives and the prices drop. Just a suggestion.

What exactly do you mean? Cameras don't serve apprenticeships, and you need to explain (to yourself, at least) why you need to move on.

If there are some features that the K10D has, and that the DL2 lacks, and which are preventing you from taking the kind of pictures you want to take, then fine, upgrade.

But unless you can define these features, and are certain they will make a difference, then, as Mongoose said, you'd be better off spending the money on glass.

G

When i said apprentiship i meant in a way of learning about photography and what a camera can achieve in the right hands. The DL2 did that for me and has now given me the confidence to move forward, and for me that is with the K10D. I'm sure everyone had to start somewhere and have moved on to use whatever camera they are now using. I'm no different, I've taken on board the advice thats been given and will put it to good use. I've just purchased a K10D with kit lens from Jessops for £499 a bargain i think. Will go nicely with my 80-320mm lens. Any tips will be most welcome.

Thanks
Richard

Fair enough. Good luck.

G