FS: Pentax K200D

For sale: gripped Pentax K200D. Mint condition except a missing Green button (lost it while travelling).

Reason: changing to K-x

PM with offers.

Italpasta, I'm potentially interested, but would like (much) more information!

In particular, what are you including? Software, cables etc? Batteries? is the Grip a Pentax grip, or Ansmann or other third party? How many shutter clicks has it had? How much is shipping? Where are you based and is it possible to check the camera before buying? What payment methods do you accept?

Also, you are a brand new member to this forum. I don't wish to tarnish the reputation of trust we have here, but I note that you do not yet have any feedback from other transactions with members here. As you are a new member, do you have any feedback on other websites, for example ebay, to show that we can trust you?

Finally, it is always helpful to show pictures of the camera, and normally helpful to give a rough idea of how much you want for it. I'd really like to see some pictures!

have you still got the grip and if so how much do you want for it

You're changing a K200D for a K-x?

Is that wise?

A.

P.S. I know which I'd rather own!

Sorry for a late reply - forgot to sign up for notifications.

Answers: software - I'll check if I've still got the CD - never used it. Batteries? AA batteries go with this camera. Pentax grip. not sure how many shutter clicks it has had (not too many though as I'm not an everyday shooter). how do I check? I'm based in London. Payment methods - I'll check if I can do paypal. if you're in London - we could meet.

As for the reputation, I am not a frequent seller, so difficult to confirm. If you're in London we could meet and you could check the camera.

Price: £300 (because gripped)

bwichmawr,

could you elaborate on this, please? My main reason is less weight and much much better ISO performance. Why is the decision unwise (weather sealing aside)?

Its not unwise but it's a different camera the K-X than a K200D.

The K-X has better High ISO performance but with the low ISO the K200D is most probably better.
Don't take this that the K-X does not take good shots at low ISO, just that the K200D is slightly better most probably.

With the switch you loose.
AF indication in the viewfinder
Weather sealing
Battery grip
Money

Gain.
Lighter weight
High ISO performance
Video
Live view

All in all if you don't use high ISO often, video or live view you won't gain a thing.
I don't know how if you've some good lenses already but that are most of the time a better investment.
But that's something for you to decide, the K-X is certainly a good camera but so is the K200D.

For the shutter actions, use www.photome.de when you open a RAW file with it, it shows the number of shutter actions somewhere.

thanks for the summary Anvh

haven't got enough lenses - that's for sure. It's a hard call, but I find shooting at higher than 400 ISO in low light scenes just unusable with my K200D. Yes I will miss the battery grip and, most importantly, money, but ability to shoot in high ISO is quite important.

why would low ISO performance of K-x be inferior to K200d's?

Italpasta,

I can't add much to what Stefan says.

(Beautifully and succinctly put, Stefan!)

I guess I was thinking what I want in a camera and the K2ooD has everything I need (and more). It's so well made and has the top plate LCD which I hate to see deleted. I think it runs on AAs as well ( a huge advantage: imagine getting a new set of batteries for £4.00!).

I thought it was exceptional value and was saving up to get one. Then they stopped making it! Not mad on either of the replacements... don't want a wretched video camera, or live-view. Couldn't trade away that lovely 10mp CCD sensor...

Then there's the cost to change. It's not like you're swapping a Vespa for an Aston Martin!

Still, chaque un a son gout, and all that!

Regards,

Andrew

P.S. Give you a tenner for the K200D and I'll mend the green button and make it sing arias in pixels!

Like Andrew said you would also lose the top LCD as well.

For the ISO performance they are on par at ISO400 and above that the K-X will be better.
The K200D is better at low ISO because of the sensor, it's an CCD like Andrew said and the K-X is a CMOS.

CCD are simply better then CMOS at low ISO it's only with long exposures and high ISO where the CMOS is better.

CCD are more uniform, have less system noise and an higher dynamic range.
CMOS has the advantage that its a passive system, so it only creates heats when a pixel is working now CCD are active and there runs a current through them all the time when when you press the shutter, so if the pixel is capturing a dark shadow it will get just as hot as one capturing the sun, that's not the case with CMOS.
So with long night exposures you have less noise introduced by heat.

And CMOS is more effective with high ISO because the signal gets amplified at the pixel and converted to bits, with CCD it gets read as an analogue signal and then gets amplified and converted. During that period noise is introduced.

I'm not 100% sure I got everything right but this the basics that I understand them.


ps. Andrew, I did make a lot of mistakes with the previous comment

thank you guys for all this information. very helpful indeed! I weighed my options once again and decided to put away the money for a better lens this time. Thank you!