Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Pentax k20d  (Read 11467 times)

The View

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
Pentax k20d
« on: April 20, 2008, 08:56:43 pm »

I like the way Pentax cameras work and process color and light.

I like how the cameras handle. They are great tools.

With a digital camera you also buy certain image characteristics.

Now I read a lot of great things about the K20d. That it is a very serious improvement over the K10d, for example.

That the autofocus is not very fast and precise.

But I also read that the noise issue isn't as well resolved as with the Nikon and the Canon.

Also, isn't 14,5 Megapixel an overkill?
Logged
The View of deserts, forests, mountains. Not the TV show that I have never watched.

Geoff Wittig

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1023
Pentax k20d
« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2008, 05:40:15 pm »

Quote
I like the way Pentax cameras work and process color and light.

I like how the cameras handle. They are great tools.

With a digital camera you also buy certain image characteristics.

Now I read a lot of great things about the K20d. That it is a very serious improvement over the K10d, for example.

That the autofocus is not very fast and precise.

But I also read that the noise issue isn't as well resolved as with the Nikon and the Canon.

Also, isn't 14,5 Megapixel an overkill?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190874\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Just my 2 cents on this question...
What lenses do you own already? That's probably the most important question. At this point image quality is excellent from D-SLR's produced by Canon, Nikon, Pentax/Samsung and Sony. (I don't think there's a future for the tiny 4/3rds sensor format from Olympus, while I suspect Samsung will eventually produce a full frame sensor for Pentax). There are differences here and there, but the steady improvements in image quality, noise reduction and high ISO performance seem to be converging across brands. 14.5 megapixels is probably at the current limit for noise control in an APC sized sensor, but will surely permit a nice big print. Pentax also has probably the most intuitive and usable controls for setting exposure.

I currently use Canon's Eos system after selling my Pentax 35 mm gear to fund my purchase of the original Eos-1Ds. I do regret giving up some really superb Pentax glass, especially their 85 mm f:1.4, which is still the finest lens I ever used. So if you have a bunch of Pentax glass, the K20D is a steal at the price. Yes, autofocus probably isn't quite as good as the latest Canon or Nikon pro camera, but it's pretty good, and Pentax now has ultrasonic motors in their latest lenses.
Logged

The View

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
Pentax k20d
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2008, 06:48:16 pm »

I currently own few lenses, so I'm really free to go wherever I want.

I have never shot with a Nikon or a Canon DSLR.

I saw a comparison between the major camera in one of these photo magazines (I can't remember which one). There were shots taken from the same motif, an old steam boat on a riverside.

The interesting thing was, that a Canon and a Nikon interpret an image quite differently from the start. One is really buying into this when buying dslr.

The Nikon looked like it had a more even picture, while the Canon had a more dramatic lightness distribution. While the magazine critisized the 40d for having more trouble in the highlights than the Nikon, I found the Canon image better as an image.

Those test people really only count resolution lines and never put an artistic eye on the general character of an image such a DSLR produces.

I need a pro quality camera now, and I don't care if I have to change from Pentax.

The 40d would be good price-wise.

So, I just wonder how the Pentax would compare to the 40d or the 300d.


PS: HAS ANYBODY NOTICED THE DIFFERENCES IN IMAGE CHARACTER BETWEEN MAJOR CAMERA BRANDS?
« Last Edit: April 21, 2008, 06:48:38 pm by The View »
Logged
The View of deserts, forests, mountains. Not the TV show that I have never watched.

mbridgers

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 156
Pentax k20d
« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2008, 07:14:42 pm »

Carl Weese has written his impressions of the K20D over at The Online Photographer:
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/t...x-k20d-rep.html

For what its worth, I switched to the K10D from the Canon 10D and haven't looked back.  It's a helluva system for the price, and I'm falling hard for all those beautiful prime lenses...
Logged

The View

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
Pentax k20d
« Reply #4 on: April 22, 2008, 02:08:26 am »

I'm thinking of renting a Canon 40d, and a Nikon 300d.

So I can see what fits my shooting style best.

It's a quite expensive research, but I can't think of a better way to choose a camera than to shoot with it before you buy.
Logged
The View of deserts, forests, mountains. Not the TV show that I have never watched.

Geoff Wittig

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1023
Pentax k20d
« Reply #5 on: April 22, 2008, 07:02:47 am »

PS: HAS ANYBODY NOTICED THE DIFFERENCES IN IMAGE CHARACTER BETWEEN MAJOR CAMERA BRANDS?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191078\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]

If you're shooting Raw files, you have so much flexibility in interpretation that I think it overrides any nominal differences in image characteristic between camera brands. And I think that image quality is gradually converging between brands; witness the leap in noise control at higher ISO's by Nikon, which used to be noticeably inferior to Canon in this regard.
Logged

tetsuo77

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 95
Pentax k20d
« Reply #6 on: April 22, 2008, 07:30:59 am »

Quote from: Geoff Wittig,Apr 22 2008, 12:02 PM
PS: HAS ANYBODY NOTICED THE DIFFERENCES IN IMAGE CHARACTER BETWEEN MAJOR CAMERA BRANDS?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191078\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you're shooting Raw files, you have so much flexibility in interpretation that I think it overrides any nominal differences in image characteristic between camera brands. And I think that image quality is gradually converging between brands; witness the leap in noise control at higher ISO's by Nikon, which used to be noticeably inferior to Canon in this regard.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191181\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]


But I do have noticed very different image character, specially between Pentax, Canon, and the rest [being somewhat harmonious with Nikon, Sony-Minolta, Oly, Hasselblad, Panasonic, and so on]. for instance, Pentax has a much softer "default" approach than the rest, and incidentally, their pictures look somwhat deeper or darker.


Besides, there are very big differences with WB performance.
Logged

Dale_Cotton

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 588
    • http://daystarvisions.com
Pentax k20d
« Reply #7 on: April 22, 2008, 07:51:24 am »

Geoff beat me to the punch, as I was writing this. Guess I'll leave the first part in anyhow:

The View wrote:
Quote
The interesting thing was, that a Canon and a Nikon interpret an image quite differently from the start. One is really buying into this when buying dslr.
Well, if you're shooting JPEGs then this might be a bit of a problem. But even then, the K20D has the usual set of JPEG adjustments. They all also have white balance tuning. If you shoot RAW, then you have complete control of your colour output. In LightRoom I spent a few hours tweaking the colour settings during the first week with the K20D, saved that as a default for the camera and now get accurate colours across the spectrum.

Quote
The Nikon looked like it had a more even picture, while the Canon had a more dramatic lightness distribution.
Again: that's something you should be in charge of, not the camera.

In choosing a camera, I'd think the important thing would be to get the "hard" aspects right. If I want in-camera spot metering, then I have to rule out the Canon. If I want maximum high ISO goodness, then I have to rule out the Pentax.

Quote
I'm thinking of renting a Canon 40d, and a Nikon 300d.
Another approach is to settle on one candidate based on feature set, then buy that from a local shop with a good return policy. It's really hard to learn a camera in just the few days of a rental period. Consider the example of Bill Mitchell's experience on this TOP thread. Not hitting upon an obscure setting buried in the manual made all the difference in his testing experience. I'm still learning how best to use the K20D's feature set nearly six weeks after buying it.

Geoff Wittig wrote:
Quote
14.5 megapixels is probably at the current limit for noise control in an APC sized sensor, but will surely permit a nice big print.
The K20D's sensor is a bit heavy in shadow noise, so maybe even a bit past the limit. And, yep: the prints are truly stunning. But as The View says 14.6 mp is overkill in at least one regard: it mercilessly reveals every weakness of a lens.
Logged

douglasf13

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 547
Pentax k20d
« Reply #8 on: April 22, 2008, 07:29:08 pm »

Quote
I'm thinking of renting a Canon 40d, and a Nikon 300d.

So I can see what fits my shooting style best.

It's a quite expensive research, but I can't think of a better way to choose a camera than to shoot with it before you buy.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191154\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

  This is exactly why you should try the Sony A700, too.  Amazing handling with well thought out controls.
Logged

The View

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
Pentax k20d
« Reply #9 on: April 22, 2008, 10:35:36 pm »

I didn't mention that I NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER shoot JPEG.


I'm giving this point its own post, because it is so important to me:


SHOOTING RAW, ARE THERE STILL DIFFERENCES IN IMAGE CHARACTERISTICS?
Logged
The View of deserts, forests, mountains. Not the TV show that I have never watched.

The View

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
Pentax k20d
« Reply #10 on: April 22, 2008, 10:44:04 pm »

The main problem I have with the K20d is the noise.

Looks like noise starts showing up as low as ISO 800.

I'm waiting for reviews to come out and check that. If it's already noise at ISO 800, I'll forget it and just sell everything Pentax I have.
Logged
The View of deserts, forests, mountains. Not the TV show that I have never watched.

DarkPenguin

  • Guest
Pentax k20d
« Reply #11 on: April 22, 2008, 11:22:06 pm »

What doesn't have noise at iso 800?  Get a D3.
Logged

The View

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
Pentax k20d
« Reply #12 on: April 22, 2008, 11:41:14 pm »

If one trusts the reviews (should I), then the Nikon 300d has almost no noise at 800, and so has the Canon 40d.

Or should I have gotten the wrong impressions here?

(I just need to work at 800 without tonal separation getting bogged down).
Logged
The View of deserts, forests, mountains. Not the TV show that I have never watched.

DonWeston

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 148
Pentax k20d
« Reply #13 on: April 23, 2008, 08:10:25 am »

FWIW - I owned both a D300 and 40D. Currently I own  a 5D and 40D and sold off the Nikon gear. This is in direct contrast to many on the forums but different strokes for different folks....

Each of these two cameras systems give a different look, handle exposure differently and contrast range. That being said if shooting RAW, one can moderate the differences to a large extent, and looking at prints not your monitor, it can be very hard to tell which image was shot with what camera. These differences show up between any  camera brands and even images from my Leica M8 has a individualistic appearances.

No one can say what is best for you, testing each is the only way to see what body works best for you and what image type you prefer. No way to predict that for anyone. Testing is the single BEST method. I started off in the film days being a devoted Nikon fan and most of my  photo friends still are, but I started with a D30 in the dslr series and have gone back and forth at times, believing the Nikon promises and thinking the Nikon fit my hands better but over time it has been the Canon with the handling I now prefer. BTW I typically make large prints 20x30 and up, and I would not worry about slight MP differences between  any of these cameras unless you make this size prints routinely. Although the camera brands show different noise handling I ended up prefering the Canon approach here and find the 40D for me and my work at least equal to the D300, and the 5D still, even at its advanced age, holding its own in this price range still. I say that as a 5D now approaches the new D300 price and can equal it if you buy a demo or refurb.  Like I said my mileage may vary from yours but that is how the cards fell for me...hope this helps....
Logged

Tony Beach

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 452
    • http://imageevent.com/tonybeach/twelveimages
Pentax k20d
« Reply #14 on: April 23, 2008, 11:14:21 am »

Quote
SHOOTING RAW, ARE THERE STILL DIFFERENCES IN IMAGE CHARACTERISTICS?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191340\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I can only address the D300 because that's the only camera mentioned here that I own.  RAW files have to be converted, so the image characteristics can change dramatically depending on which color profile is used for the conversion.  At ISO 200 I get 8.5 stops of DR from my D300, at ISO 1600 the files are surprisingly good and I would match them up against the 5D (but not if I had to use ACR to convert the D300 files).
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Pentax k20d
« Reply #15 on: April 23, 2008, 11:57:42 am »

Quote
Also, isn't 14,5 Megapixel an overkill?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190874\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That depends mostly on whether you need that sort of detail in your prints, and have (or are willing to buy) sufficiently sharp lenses. Certainly the K20D's sensor will handle well the great proportion of highly detailed images that are taken at low to moderate ISO speeds. Anyway, the pixel count range n recent SLR models from 10MP to 14.5MP is rather small in both resolution and effects on noise level: about 20% linear difference in resolution, not enough to move up one standard print size at the same PPI, and maybe 1/2 stop difference in expected ISO speed.

And as to higher ISO speeds, I suggest skepticism about the ill-founded idea that a modest increase in pixel count in the same sensor size will adversely effect the noise levels (or dynamic range) that you see in prints of the same size. Instead, the extra dithering from the smaller output pixel size from the higher pixel count sensor (or the extra NR processing allowed by starting with more resolution) seems to roughly balance out any measured decline in measured "per pixel" quality. (Beware viewing high ISO images at equal PPI, which is enlarging the higher MP image more in IQ comparisons.)
Logged

The View

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
Pentax k20d
« Reply #16 on: April 23, 2008, 01:24:05 pm »

Quote
I can only address the D300 because that's the only camera mentioned here that I own.  RAW files have to be converted, so the image characteristics can change dramatically depending on which color profile is used for the conversion.  At ISO 200 I get 8.5 stops of DR from my D300, at ISO 1600 the files are surprisingly good and I would match them up against the 5D (but not if I had to use ACR to convert the D300 files).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191407\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I repeatedly heard that ACR isn't the top choice for converting images.

So you are using Nikon Capture?
Logged
The View of deserts, forests, mountains. Not the TV show that I have never watched.

The View

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
Pentax k20d
« Reply #17 on: April 23, 2008, 01:33:50 pm »

Quote
FWIW - I owned both a D300 and 40D. Currently I own  a 5D and 40D and sold off the Nikon gear. This is in direct contrast to many on the forums but different strokes for different folks....

Each of these two cameras systems give a different look, handle exposure differently and contrast range. That being said if shooting RAW, one can moderate the differences to a large extent, and looking at prints not your monitor, it can be very hard to tell which image was shot with what camera. These differences show up between any  camera brands and even images from my Leica M8 has a individualistic appearances.

No one can say what is best for you, testing each is the only way to see what body works best for you and what image type you prefer. No way to predict that for anyone. Testing is the single BEST method. I started off in the film days being a devoted Nikon fan and most of my  photo friends still are, but I started with a D30 in the dslr series and have gone back and forth at times, believing the Nikon promises and thinking the Nikon fit my hands better but over time it has been the Canon with the handling I now prefer. BTW I typically make large prints 20x30 and up, and I would not worry about slight MP differences between  any of these cameras unless you make this size prints routinely. Although the camera brands show different noise handling I ended up prefering the Canon approach here and find the 40D for me and my work at least equal to the D300, and the 5D still, even at its advanced age, holding its own in this price range still. I say that as a 5D now approaches the new D300 price and can equal it if you buy a demo or refurb.  Like I said my mileage may vary from yours but that is how the cards fell for me...hope this helps....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191385\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This makes  perfect sense to me.

I'll take my time to find what fits my way to work well.
Logged
The View of deserts, forests, mountains. Not the TV show that I have never watched.

The View

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
Pentax k20d
« Reply #18 on: April 23, 2008, 01:35:44 pm »

Quote
I suggest skepticism about the ill-founded idea that a modest increase in pixel count in the same sensor size will adversely effect the noise levels (or dynamic range) that you see in prints of the same size. Instead, the extra dithering from the smaller output pixel size from the higher pixel count sensor (or the extra NR processing allowed by starting with more resolution) seems to roughly balance out any measured decline in measured "per pixel" quality. (Beware viewing high ISO images at equal PPI, which is enlarging the higher MP image more in IQ comparisons.)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191416\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


REgarding the Pentax 20d, I read a test stating that even though the pixel count increased by 50%, the dynamic range increased slightly.
Logged
The View of deserts, forests, mountains. Not the TV show that I have never watched.

Tony Beach

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 452
    • http://imageevent.com/tonybeach/twelveimages
Pentax k20d
« Reply #19 on: April 23, 2008, 04:11:18 pm »

Quote
I repeatedly heard that ACR isn't the top choice for converting images.

So you are using Nikon Capture?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm mostly using Capture NX right now, it came free with the D300 but that offer is probably ending soon if it's even still available.

One consideration regarding pixel density is diffraction and the CoC.  There is an article on that topic [a href=\"http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm]here.[/url]  It seems to me that the sweet spot for the DX sensor is about 10 MP; but I do enjoy the crisp detail I get from my D300, and its 12.3 MP sensor has better DR and less noise at higher ISOs than my D200 10.2 MP sensor does.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2008, 04:11:44 pm by Tony Beach »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up