Interesting article in Amateur Photographer


KatierRax

Link Posted 12/02/2014 - 20:01
There's a short article in AP which is interesting for us Pentax Users. They are comparing the *ist DL with a K500 and also the original software with current photomanipulation software. The conclusion is that while, of course, the K500 is a substantially better camera, with modern software, in favourable conditions, the older DSLR is very very capable and largely indistiguishable even if printed out at A3.

johnriley

Link Posted 12/02/2014 - 20:45
It's a fair comment. Our first Pentax DSLRs were the *istD and those images come up very nicely alongside newer ones.
Best regards, John

K10D

Link Posted 12/02/2014 - 22:46
One of the reasons I don't sell on any of my cameras. They all take good pictures. I specifically wouldn't part with the istD or K10D as I like the output of the CCD.

Best regards

andrewk

Link Posted 12/02/2014 - 23:48
It doesn't surprise me.

I have yet to see a noticeable and consistent difference in IQ between 16"x12" prints from my K200D, K30 or any taken by any other marque, whether APS-C or full frame.

Andrew
Flickr photostream

richandfleur

Link Posted 13/02/2014 - 00:16
I'd agree with that, in the right lighting conditions etc. I've resorted to the K100d whilst my K-30 is being looked at, and a few shots blew me away really! High ISO ability suffered and there was a definite tendency to focus on the wider background, even on spot focussing mode, but on the whole those shots that did come out were OK, especially at web resolution.

TonyM

Link Posted 13/02/2014 - 09:41
My son regularly takes the *istDS when we go out. As long as you avoid the obvious situations where stabilisation/high ISO abilities come in, it is capable of taking great pictures. And it is still a pleasure to use (although the mirror slap is painfully loud!!!)

Tony

SteveF

Link Posted 13/02/2014 - 11:01
I agree.

Virtually the sole reason for my upgrades has been the availability of improved high ISO performance.

I have an istDS, K100DSuper, K-x and K5. I keep saying I must move on the older bodies, but somehow can't bring myself to do it.

wvbarnes

Link Posted 13/02/2014 - 11:27
My first 'digital' camera was a Kodak Easyshare 4MP CCD point and shoot zoom camera I took on holiday to Lesvos Greece back in 2003. We're finally back there this late May and I'll of course be armed with my K5 and lenses.

For a daytime landscape these early efforts hold up well especially viewed on a screen as many only do nowadays. Closer examination of the set in poorer light reveals artefacts, bad noise in low light and hit and miss focus at short telephoto or close ups. They also reveal how much I've learned since then as I've advanced through bridge cameras (burnt highlights and noise) to three Pentax DSLRs in a row.

I bet you could say the same of many cheap film era 35mm compacts (I was happily using a little Pentax compact zoom the year before) never mind the excellent early Pentax DSLRs.

spinno

Link Posted 13/02/2014 - 16:18
My first DSLR was the istDL..cracking camera as I recall.
David

bwlchmawr

Link Posted 13/02/2014 - 17:33
I so like the results from the "early" 6mp CCD sensors that I recently bought a K100D to replace one which was stolen.

It's taken me ages to get to grips with the K5 and although I have, finally, learnt how I can get pleasing results from it, I actually think the simpler to set up and operate earlier cameras produce lovely photographs.

I often wonder what might have happened if manufacturers had put more R&D into the more expensive to produce CCD sensors. Just how good would they be now, I wonder?
Best wishes,

Andrew

"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050 http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05

gwing

Link Posted 13/02/2014 - 17:53
andrewk wrote:
It doesn't surprise me.

I have yet to see a noticeable and consistent difference in IQ between 16"x12" prints from my K200D, K30 or any taken by any other marque, whether APS-C or full frame.

Andrew

I can probably find some bit of old rubbish to swap with your K30 then Andrew

andrewk

Link Posted 13/02/2014 - 18:06
Is this K5-IIs old rubbish or K3 old rubbish? I think the K30 is a great camera - and definitely wouldn't swap it for any Canikon old rubbish, even if it were full frame.

Andrew
Flickr photostream

Jonathan-Mac

Link Posted 13/02/2014 - 21:48
I'm still using my K200D and haven't upgraded due to the loss of battery grip and upper LCD on the lower range cameras. I'm considering a change this year for improved high-ISO and more accurate AF, but I don't expect improved IQ at ISO 100 or a camera more pleasant to hold and use.
Pentax hybrid user - Digital K3 & K200D, film 645 and 35mm SLR and Pentax (&other) lenses adapted to Fuji X digital
Fan of DA limited and old manual lenses

Jetsam1

Link Posted 13/02/2014 - 21:57
One thing I have noticed is that the dust removal is much, much better on the K5 than the K200D.

Miss the ability to use AA batteries (need to get a better charger as last time I took it out it drained within an hour!).

From what I remember the main impetus for going to the K5 was high ISO and better AF.......... I inherited a little money which made the upgrade possible but without this I could easily still be using the K200 as my only camera.
K5, K200 and several film Pentax cameras!

JohnX

Link Posted 13/02/2014 - 22:01
Jetsam1 wrote:
Miss the ability to use AA batteries..

Not if you use a grip!
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.