K10d or K100?

Hi, I have been using a compact digital camara for the last couple of years and have enjoyed using it in manual mode etc. I have also been using various Pentax and Nikons film cameras for the last 20 years.

So now in the New Year I have decided that Im going to buy a Pentax DSLR, but Im not certain which to go for. In a way I would like to buy the K10D with the weatherseals etc, but do I really need the 10 megapixels? 6 megapixels from the K100 would be able for my needs.

What is the difference between the K10D and the K100 Super apart from the Megapixels? Im going to buy a Sigma 17-70mm lens to go with the DSLR as I do quite a lot of wide angle photos and theres been some good reports on this lens on forums, so buying the K100 would keep the cost down quite a lot.
Any suggestions?

Very basically...
the K100D is smaller and lighter, has good low light performance
the K10 has more dedicated buttons for less menu pecking
Try handling both and see how they feel to you.
10 MP helps if you want crop pictures .
The K10 is apparently getting heavy discounts now ( not in this part of the world !)
The new models will be announced soon.
This topic has had quite a bit of discussion a google search will bring them up

Pete

K10D (and the discontinued *ist DS) has a better viewfinder: pentaprism and 0.95X magnification versus penta-mirror 0.85X.

I was in your position a few months back and bought the K100D as it seemed the most credible low cost DSLR with a name I knew from my youth.
I'm very happy with it and it's done its job of getting me into DSLR and beginning to understand digital issues and I have accumulated lenses for it. The menu pecking required within menus is irritating but I don't have to do it too much so it's no big deal - maybe once each session.
A lot depends on the price difference and the feel. The K100D seems nice and light and fits my hand well which is important to me as it's no burden to carry and use it. The extra pixels would be nice but the lack doesn't limit me at present. If the K10 was only a little more than the K100D then I suspect if you're technically minded it's the better buy. If you can be overwhelmed by technicalities then I expect the K100D is a quicker learning curve.
I don't suppose that helped at all!
Mike

with 20 years experince with cameras (presumably slrs) go with the k10.
the weather seals will come in handy....
your learning curve will be focussed on the D in dslr, and as such you won't be as ovewhelmed as a novice would be.
the digital bodies will be unstable in pricing for a few more years yet so an investment in good glass would be wise. you'll find a better/cheaper model in a couple years as far as the body is concerned.

I was in this position - twenty years on and off (mostly off, recently) with film SLRs (ME Super and Super A), and went for the K10D. I haven't been at all disappointed, and, more to the point, knowing what I know now I'm very glad to have made the decision that I did.

There's a feature-for-feature comparison here.

If you're not intimidated by a few more options (that you can completely ignore if you want to), then get the 10.

Or if your budget can stretch to it, one of the new Pentax bodies that are (heavily rumoured) to be announced next month.

I'd forgotten about weather seals - that might swing it for me now but when I bought I didn't want to spend too much in case it was just a passing fancy. Then again seeing what you guys got/spent on Christmas I am in a minority regarding spending!

Why a Pentax? I think I might have gone Canon or Nikon in hindsight - that said I like the K100D and I'm sure I'd like the K10 as well. All those old lenses waiting to be used as well.

Mike

Thank you for all your suggestions.

I have been using a Kodak Digi compact which has Auto, scenes and manual settings which sounds very similar to the K100. I have been using it mostly in manual and shutter priority, and with flash compensation.

I want to move on to some thing more challenging, so it looks like the K10D is the right choice. The K100 is about £350 here in the UK and the K10D is about £450. So the £100 difference would have been half way towards the Sigma lens.

Does anyone know of any bad points of the Sigma 17-70mm lens?

I've heard this argument often, as a reason for getting the cheaper body.

It's certainly the case that good lenses are a better investment long term, since ultimately they make a much bigger difference to the quality of the photos you can take.

However, I don't believe that the latter really justifies the former, unless you're so strapped for cash that one lens is all you'll be able to afford for a very long time.

In reality, I suspect most people's experience will be similar to mine - getting my first digital SLR (the K10D in my case) was so exciting, that I simply had to have a lot more stuff

So the difference in price between the 10 and the 100 turned out to be a very small proportion of the total, and I'm very happy now to have the 10.

So although it's true that the savings on the body might be a significant fraction of a lens, and although it's true that lenses, long term, are more important, in practice, I wouldn't skimp on the body for the sake of half a lens - save up a little longer and get both would be my recommendation.

Why not wait a little longer and see what the new models are like. There may well be some great bargains on the K100/K10 at the same time.

Well I am stunned by the amount you guys spend on your hobby. I have spent a fair bit since getting my K100D but only once I was sure I was going to use the camera a decent amount. I also sold my old Olypus kit for a fair bit which helped.
Personally I wouldn't get any lenses beyond the kit until I knew what I wanted. I waited and bought a Sigma 10-20 as I like (and used to like) wide angles and getting close. I wouldn't want to duplicate the kit lens - which is pretty OK I reckon - until I knew it wasn't reaching the standards I wanted.
The ability to use the old A series prines from film cameras lets you try different lenses at very modest cost but nothing like the 10-20 range.
Just to muddy the water still further are Samsung still offering good deals on their version of the K10 with 18-55 plus the seemingly excellent 50-200 (which is another lens I got s/h).
Mike

This is the thing. It's not till after you have it that you realise.

Just to put the "stunning" amount I've spent in perspective, I saved for two years for the K10D. A few quid here, a few quid there, and to everyone that asked me what I wanted for birthday or Xmas, I asked for a contribution to my dSLR - which didn't even exist when I started saving for it.

And like you, I was just going to use the kit lens and my old A-series lenses.

Then I bought one long telephoto, for considerably more than the difference between the 10/100 bodies, and the perspective became clear. If you'll pardon the pun. And since, I've bought a few second hand lenses on eBay.

The other reason I think it's better to get the body you really want, is that its resale value will be much, much lower. Whereas lenses hold their value very well, so mistakes are easily rectified.

Chris - Good points well made and I would almost certainly prefer to have a K10D now as some of the controls are tucked away in the menus on the K100D. Not a big deal but an irritation and the extra pixels would be nice too.

Nice to know that someone else likes to/has to save up before they buy! I can't believe the level of debt that prevails in this country.

Mike