EOS 10D vs Pentax K100D

[Lord Blackadder]

I've spent some time using a Canon EOS 10D, and I'm looking to buy a new DSLR for myself - my first SLR-type camera. I'm looking at the Pentax K100D or possibly a Digital Rebel, but since I'm already familiar with the EOS 10D do you guys think I have much to gain by buying a new DLSR versus hunting up a used 10D?

 

[wmmk]

I've spent some time using a Canon EOS 10D, and I'm looking to buy a new DSLR for myself - my first SLR-type camera. I'm looking at the Pentax K100D or possibly a Digital Rebel, but since I'm already familiar with the EOS 10D do you guys think I have much to gain by buying a new DLSR versus hunting up a used 10D?

Hmmm...
It all depends on what lenses you might want. If you'll only be shooting with kit-grade glass, (18-55, 70-300, 55-200, etc.), you might want to go with the K100D. It has in body shake reduction and a very nice image processor if you shoot jpeg and don't like doing post production. That said, I chose the K100D as a first DSLR for this reason, but am now venturing in to (Canon) pro glass, already have a Canon film SLR, and might be selling my K100D to get some cash for a used 1D (the 2001 model). If expandability is a big deal, go with Canon.

Speaking of that, if you'd like to purchase a K100D with lenses, a flash, a card, and a bag, feel free to PM me.

 

[jlcharles]

The 10D does not take EF-S glass. If you were to get a Canon, I'd suggest going to the 20D. I have one and love it.

 

[Digital Skunk]

The interesting thing about digital is that most bodies don't last as long as glass. If you know you want to stick with Canon for the long haul then go for the 10D... but remember that bodies don't last long. You are better off doing for a newer body no matter what when it comes to DSLRs. The 20D is a better option since it is not as old as the now 6 year old 10D and it is a bit faster and has better IQ.

If you aren't worried about future glass purchases and the like then the new K100D or K10D will serve you very well. In fact the K10D if it is in your price range is a bit better than the 20D/30D so going all Pentax isn't something to frown upon. Weigh your options and determine which system you want to grow with or whether you want to grow at all. Once you have your system, pick the newest camera you can afford. If there is no system loyalty get the best bang for your buck, which may just be Pentax.

 

[jpfisher]

It's also worth considering that if you are interested in high-end glass, the Pentax Limited series of lenses delivers at a generally lower price point than Canon's L series. The lineup is a little shaky at the moment on the zoom side of things (they have a 16-50 f/2.8 and 50-135 f/2.8 coming out "real soon now" and a 60-250 f/4 scheduled for later this year as part of the DA* series of digital-only lenses). They also have a 14mm f/2.8 that comes in at a much lower price point than the equivalent Canon L version (granted, I haven't seen any comparison in optical performance between the two, the Canon could very well blow it out of the water).

I've got the 31mm f/1.8 FA Limited and the 77mm f/1.8 FA Limited. I absolutely love the 31mm -- I've only had the 77mm for a few days, but took it out this weekend in NYC. I haven't downloaded my memory card as of yet, though. Fantastic build quality on these, though -- metal construction, not a hunk of cheap plastic.

These work on both digital and film bodies; there is also a series of DA Limited "pancake" lenses that are digital only (21mm f/3.2, 40mm f/2.8 and 70mm f/2.4).

 

[miloblithe]

It's also worth considering that if you are interested in high-end glass, the Pentax Limited series of lenses delivers at a generally lower price point than Canon's L series. ...

And they are lower speced than the L glass:

Pentax SMC DA 21mm f/3.2 AL Limited (Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 USM L)
Pentax SMC FA 31mm f/1.8 AL Limited (Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 USM L)
Pentax SMC DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited
Pentax SMC FA 43mm f/1.9 Limited (Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 USM L)
Pentax SMC DA 70mm f/2.4 Limited
Pentax SMC FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited (Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 USM L)

Canon's f/1.8 85mm lens, for example, is less than half the price of the 77mm f/1.8 Limited.

I think if you really look at the specs, Canon makes the least expensive lenses excepting 3rd party lenses.

 

[jpfisher]

And they are lower speced than the L glass:

Pentax SMC DA 21mm f/3.2 AL Limited (Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 USM L)
Pentax SMC FA 31mm f/1.8 AL Limited (Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 USM L)
Pentax SMC DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited
Pentax SMC FA 43mm f/1.9 Limited (Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 USM L)
Pentax SMC DA 70mm f/2.4 Limited
Pentax SMC FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited (Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 USM L)

Canon's f/1.8 85mm lens, for example, is less than half the price of the 77mm f/1.8 Limited.

I think if you really look at the specs, Canon makes the least expensive lenses excepting 3rd party lenses.

If we're going to compare items, let's go apples to apples, no?

The DA Limited's all sacrifice wider apertures for compact size. Pentax does not have a 20mm-ish lens with an extremely wide aperture in their library at this point. At one point they did produce a 24mm f/2, but from what I can see from the Photozone review it wasn't anything to go out of your way to get.

As for the comparisons between the f/1.2 85 and 35 and their f/1.8 Pentax cousins, you're spending quite a bit more money for the extra light coming into the Canon glass.

I'm not going to sit here and say that Canon doesn't make a good product -- I've owned Canon point and shoots before; went with Pentax for the DSLR becasue I had a large library of 1970's-vintage manual primes ranging from 28mm up to 300mm... but of all the things I've seen Canon accused of, being inexpensive has never been one of them. I'm in agreeement with Digital Skunk in that Pentax offers better 'bang for your buck' than Canon.

 

[miloblithe]

Well, to be fair, you were the one who compared the Limited series to the L series lenses, not me.

I didn't realize Pentax had these huge rebates on their lenses right now! That changes things up a bit. But if you try to compare apples to apples, I think Canon does better than you'd expect. For example, Pentax's 12-24 is very expensive. And Pentax doesn't have as many cheaper options like Canon. Like the 85mm f/1.8 is $330.

 

[ChrisA]

I've spent some time using a Canon EOS 10D, and I'm looking to buy a new DSLR for myself - my first SLR-type camera. I'm looking at the Pentax K100D or possibly a Digital Rebel, but since I'm already familiar with the EOS 10D do you guys think I have much to gain by buying a new DLSR versus hunting up a used 10D?

The big difference between the Canon and the Pentax is what lenses will fit. Figure out what lenses you want now and what you might want in five years or so then buy the Nikon, Canon or Pentax body to fit.

I think the least important choice when you put together a DSLR system with which body to get. The body has very little effect on the final image but the worls really does look different through a different lens

 

[Digital Skunk]

It's also worth considering that if you are interested in high-end glass, the Pentax Limited series of lenses delivers at a generally lower price point than Canon's L series. The lineup is a little shaky at the moment on the zoom side of things (they have a 16-50 f/2.8 and 50-135 f/2.8 coming out "real soon now" and a 60-250 f/4 scheduled for later this year as part of the DA* series of digital-only lenses). They also have a 14mm f/2.8 that comes in at a much lower price point than the equivalent Canon L version (granted, I haven't seen any comparison in optical performance between the two, the Canon could very well blow it out of the water).

I've got the 31mm f/1.8 FA Limited and the 77mm f/1.8 FA Limited. I absolutely love the 31mm -- I've only had the 77mm for a few days, but took it out this weekend in NYC. I haven't downloaded my memory card as of yet, though. Fantastic build quality on these, though -- metal construction, not a hunk of cheap plastic.

These work on both digital and film bodies; there is also a series of DA Limited "pancake" lenses that are digital only (21mm f/3.2, 40mm f/2.8 and 70mm f/2.4).

Pentax is slowing beating out Olympus for the third seat in DSLR sales... I didn't even know that had such an extensive lens line up... If I were the kid I would go for the Pentax if the only other body I could afford would be a 6 year old Canon body.

And they are lower speced than the L glass:

Pentax SMC DA 21mm f/3.2 AL Limited (Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 USM L)
Pentax SMC FA 31mm f/1.8 AL Limited (Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 USM L)
Pentax SMC DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited
Pentax SMC FA 43mm f/1.9 Limited (Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 USM L)
Pentax SMC DA 70mm f/2.4 Limited
Pentax SMC FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited (Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 USM L)

Canon's f/1.8 85mm lens, for example, is less than half the price of the 77mm f/1.8 Limited.

I think if you really look at the specs, Canon makes the least expensive lenses excepting 3rd party lenses.

Canon does make the best speced lenses for the market, but they also leave out a few features and backwards compatibility with older camera bodies.

 

[ChrisA]

Well, to be fair, you were the one who compared the Limited series to the L series lenses, not me.

I didn't realize Pentax had these huge rebates on their lenses right now! That changes things up a bit. But if you try to compare apples to apples, I think Canon does better than you'd expect. For example, Pentax's 12-24 is very expensive. And Pentax doesn't have as many cheaper options like Canon. Like the 85mm f/1.8 is $330.

I think Pentax is more like Nikon than Canon. Like Pentax, old Nikon lenses from the 1960's can still (mostly) be used, Nikon does the rebate thing periodically too. How to choose? Just thing about the total system you want down the road.

 

[jpfisher]

Well, to be fair, you were the one who compared the Limited series to the L series lenses, not me.

I didn't realize Pentax had these huge rebates on their lenses right now! That changes things up a bit. But if you try to compare apples to apples, I think Canon does better than you'd expect. For example, Pentax's 12-24 is very expensive. And Pentax doesn't have as many cheaper options like Canon. Like the 85mm f/1.8 is $330.

Guilty as charged. I didn't realize the L's were 1.2 in focal lengths where the FA Limiteds were in the 1.8 range.. granted, most of the time you'll be stopping the lens down in most situations -- my eyes have some trouble getting the focus on my 50mm at 1.4 in many situations, especially in lower light when that aperture is most useful.

I don't know if you're familar with the Photozone review site, but they have a nice selection of lens tests along with full-resolution images -- http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html -- and, they do mention the cost as one of the drawbacks on the FA 77mm.

You can use any K-mount or M42 Screwmount (with an adapter) on the Pentax digital bodies, so I'll say that there are plenty of cheaper options out there... but the 85mm f/1.8 is not one of them. I've seen my version of that lens go for over $600 on eBay recently -- and that's a full manual lens.

The current rebates are very nice. I got my check for the DA 14mm I purchased in late April a couple weeks ago -- much quicker than a lot of computer rebates I've dealt with. I'll end up paying about $540 after rebate for the 77mm... still $200 more than the Canon in this case. Did I say mea culpa on that one already?

Happy shooting... not sure if you have any of the L lenses, but if you want to share some of your favorite shots send me a PM and I'll make some selections from my gallery this evening when I'm home from work.

Jim

 

[wmmk]

Hmmm...
It all depends on what lenses you might want. If you'll only be shooting with kit-grade glass, (18-55, 70-300, 55-200, etc.), you might want to go with the K100D. It has in body shake reduction and a very nice image processor if you shoot jpeg and don't like doing post production. That said, I chose the K100D as a first DSLR for this reason, but am now venturing in to (Canon) pro glass, already have a Canon film SLR, and might be selling my K100D to get some cash for a used 1D (the 2001 model). If expandability is a big deal, go with Canon.

Speaking of that, if you'd like to purchase a K100D with lenses, a flash, a card, and a bag, feel free to PM me.

Never mind about that last part. I just sold my whole Pentax kit for a very good price.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Ha, hadn't checked this thread in a day and look what happens...

I didn't want to make it a Canon v. Pentax debate, but the camera I have used most so far is the EOS 10D. I don't have any lenses as yet. I use the camera in my archaeology work - low light, no flash, on a tripod with a 28-105 zoom lens. We also use film cameras (Canon EOS) with 50mm or 28mm lenses. By the way, the 28mm on the 10D can't come close to the field of view of the 28mm on the film cameras. You guys are obviously familiar with this, but the fact that the digital's CCD is not 35mm in size makes life difficult when I'm trying to replicate a shot between cameras, which I do every day...I need a wider angle lens to replicate the film cameras' 28mm.

I'm enough of a noobie that it doesn't matter to me which brand I get, but I was just curious whether it would be a bad move to buy a used 10D, or spend a couple hundred more for a new DSLR, of which the Pentax seems the most tempting at the price point I can afford. Do these bodies really have a lifespan issue like some posters have mentioned? Is it a bad idea to buy a 6-year old 10D?

 

[miloblithe]

Guilty as charged. I didn't realize the L's were 1.2 in focal lengths where the FA Limiteds were in the 1.8 range.. granted, most of the time you'll be stopping the lens down in most situations -- my eyes have some trouble getting the focus on my 50mm at 1.4 in many situations, especially in lower light when that aperture is most useful.

I don't know if you're familar with the Photozone review site, but they have a nice selection of lens tests along with full-resolution images -- http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html -- and, they do mention the cost as one of the drawbacks on the FA 77mm.

You can use any K-mount or M42 Screwmount (with an adapter) on the Pentax digital bodies, so I'll say that there are plenty of cheaper options out there... but the 85mm f/1.8 is not one of them. I've seen my version of that lens go for over $600 on eBay recently -- and that's a full manual lens.

The current rebates are very nice. I got my check for the DA 14mm I purchased in late April a couple weeks ago -- much quicker than a lot of computer rebates I've dealt with. I'll end up paying about $540 after rebate for the 77mm... still $200 more than the Canon in this case. Did I say mea culpa on that one already?

Happy shooting... not sure if you have any of the L lenses, but if you want to share some of your favorite shots send me a PM and I'll make some selections from my gallery this evening when I'm home from work.

Jim

I love that photozone site. I waste so much time there... To be honest, I spend too much time looking at lens stats and prices that I should be spending working with pictures I've taken, or taking more pictures, or any one of many other things.

Looking more closely, I think I've overplayed Canon's hand. Pentax does have a lot of good deals. Pentax's 50mm f/1.4 is only $200 or so, compared to roughly $300 for the Canon or Nikon equivalent. While probably not quite the same calibre of lens, Pentax's 14mm f/2.8 is only $625, compared to $1800 for the Canon or $1400+ for the Nikon. Pentax's 16-45 f/4.0 is only $410, compared to $680 for Canon's 17-40 f/4. And Pentax's cheapo 75-300 zoom is less expensive than Canon and Nikon's equivalents.

Like you pointed out, there's really no equivalent to Pentax's approach for the FA Limited and DA Limited lenses. Especially for the kinds of backpackers who cut their toothbrushes in half to save on weight, there's nothing else quite like those little Pentax pancake lenses.

The big problem for Pentax is they have a pretty abbreviated lineup right now. On the other hand, the backwards compatibility is a great advantage. And in the end, if you know what you want, for most people a selection of 50+ lenses doesn't matter. It's whether that camera has the right 2-5 lenses that'll work for you. (Total guess, but I'd imagine that 2-5 lenses is the middle of the bell curve.)

 

[Westside guy]

By the way, the 28mm on the 10D can't come close to the field of view of the 28mm on the film cameras. You guys are obviously familiar with this, but the fact that the digital's CCD is not 35mm in size makes life difficult when I'm trying to replicate a shot between cameras, which I do every day...I need a wider angle lens to replicate the film cameras' 28mm.

Canon has a 10-22mm (x1.6 = 16-34mm equivalent) that is specifically for their crop-sensor cameras. There are third-party offerings as well (although I'd think there's less reason to go that way on the Canon end, since their 10-22 is reasonably priced... unlike Nikon!). Alternatively, Canon does have more expensive dSLRs (like the 5D and 1DS) that offer a full-frame sensor.

 

[jpfisher]

I didn't want to make it a Canon v. Pentax debate, but the camera I have used most so far is the EOS 10D. I don't have any lenses as yet. I use the camera in my archaeology work - low light, no flash, on a tripod with a 28-105 zoom lens. We also use film cameras (Canon EOS) with 50mm or 28mm lenses. By the way, the 28mm on the 10D can't come close to the field of view of the 28mm on the film cameras. You guys are obviously familiar with this, but the fact that the digital's CCD is not 35mm in size makes life difficult when I'm trying to replicate a shot between cameras, which I do every day...I need a wider angle lens to replicate the film cameras' 28mm.

Hah! Well, I think that miloblithe and I might have jumped the gun a bit, but we're all here to take pictures, regardless of system -- I would never go out with my current gear and try to shoot a basketball game, a lot of Canon's longer, faster zooms would be much more appropriate for that. I'm more of a friends & family + street shooter myself.

As far as archaeology work, I can't say I have any experience. Judging by the focal length you are looking for, you'll want something about 18-70mm in the APS-C (the size of most digital sensors -- multiply the digital focal length by 1.5 to get the approximate 35mm equivalent field of view) range. Most DSLRs will come with an 18-55mm kit lens, which isn't the highest quality. Since I'm the one with the Pentax knowledge, here, I can tell you that they currently have a 16-45mm f/4 available in that range, which doesn't cover what you want to do. There is a 17-70mm scheduled for the future, but no dates on that.

There are third-party lenses that cover a lot of this range, but I'm not one to give advice on zooms -- I've got my eye on a couple that are yet to be released, but I'm generally a prime lens kind of guy.

If you do end up going with the K100D, you might want to forego the 18-55 and end up with the DA 16-45mm f/4 and the DA 50-200mm to cover your range -- that pushes the price up pretty high to get started, though. B&H has a Sigma 28-70mm (SI287028DP) for around $130 that could supplement the 18-55mm to give you a two-lens kit that basically covers the 28-105mm range on a 35mm SLR.

If you want any more advice on the K100D please feel free to ask and I'll do my best to help out.

 

[jpfisher]

I love that photozone site. I waste so much time there... To be honest, I spend too much time looking at lens stats and prices that I should be spending working with pictures I've taken, or taking more pictures, or any one of many other things.

Hah! Ok, sounds like we're two peas in the proverbial pod, just with different SLR systems. Photozone has cost me quite a bit of money over the past few months.

Looking more closely, I think I've overplayed Canon's hand. Pentax does have a lot of good deals. Pentax's 50mm f/1.4 is only $200 or so, compared to roughly $300 for the Canon or Nikon equivalent. While probably not quite the same calibre of lens, Pentax's 14mm f/2.8 is only $625, compared to $1800 for the Canon or $1400+ for the Nikon. Pentax's 16-45 f/4.0 is only $410, compared to $680 for Canon's 17-40 f/4. And Pentax's cheapo 75-300 zoom is less expensive than Canon and Nikon's equivalents.

Every system has its pluses and minuses. I often envy the Nikon guys, mainly because of the Fuji S5.

The big problem for Pentax is they have a pretty abbreviated lineup right now. On the other hand, the backwards compatibility is a great advantage. And in the end, if you know what you want, for most people a selection of 50+ lenses doesn't matter. It's whether that camera has the right 2-5 lenses that'll work for you. (Total guess, but I'd imagine that 2-5 lenses is the middle of the bell curve.)

Yes, they have a lens roadmap PDF hidden away on the Japanese site somewhere, which shows that they are working to flesh things out -- there was just a merger with Hoya (who also owns Tokina) that seems to have delayed the release of the first entries in their DA* lineup -- a 16-50mm f/2.8 (a similar design to the Tokina equivalent now available for other systems) and a 50-135mm f/2.8.

Personally I see a lot of folks going gaga over the 16-50, but I'll keep stick with my primes there.... I'm much more interested in a 60-250mm f/4 that is slated for the end of this year... which means I'll probably end up with it next March.

Anyway, that's enough BS'ing about glass for one evening...

Jim

 

[sjl]

Canon has a 10-22mm (x1.6 = 16-34mm equivalent) that is specifically for their crop-sensor cameras. There are third-party offerings as well (although I'd think there's less reason to go that way on the Canon end, since their 10-22 is reasonably priced... unlike Nikon!).

The EF-S 10-22mm is a superb lens. The only "negative", if you can call it that, is its speed: f/3.5 at the wide end. This isn't a major issue in the ultra-wide-angle scheme of things, though.

I bought mine for $AUD980 (I think, it was around that mark) with a high-quality UV filter. I'm really, really, really happy that I got it; it's a definite keeper, and I'd buy it again if I had the choice over.

It's one of two EF-S lenses that are L series in all but name and build quality (the other is the 17-55mm f/2.8).

 

[jlcharles]

Canon has a 10-22mm (x1.6 = 16-34mm equivalent) that is specifically for their crop-sensor cameras. There are third-party offerings as well (although I'd think there's less reason to go that way on the Canon end, since their 10-22 is reasonably priced... unlike Nikon!). Alternatively, Canon does have more expensive dSLRs (like the 5D and 1DS) that offer a full-frame sensor.

Like I said earlier in the thread. The 10D does not accept EF-S lenses. That mount was introduced with the original rebel, after the 10D. EF-S fits the 300D, 350D, 400D, 20D, and 30D.

 

[Westside guy]

Like I said earlier in the thread. The 10D does not accept EF-S lenses. That mount was introduced with the original rebel, after the 10D. EF-S fits the 300D, 350D, 400D, 20D, and 30D.

The mount is physically different? I assumed EF-S was analogous to Nikon's AF-S - same physical mount, but added/changed features. Cameras like the D40 can use older Nikon lenses (and older cameras can use the newer lenses), but may have to be manually focused etc.

 

[jlcharles]

The mount isn't different, but it extends further into the camera and will bang into the mirror. Without modding, it will not fit.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Thanks for the advice...I've been trying to convince the University to buy a wider angle lens for the 10D.