Ben's Bargains Serving Fresh Deals 24/7

yeah, these have been discontinued, hence the sudden drop in price
JSP

How are they, as far as DSLR's go? Any good?

Er, they aren't discontinued just yet, but the "K100D Super" replaces them in September. The "Super" variant adds new lens motor support and a few other features.

As far as "how good," they are fairly good for the price. If you want to drop $2,000+ in a dSLR, go Canon with an image stablized lens. If you want to drop $1,000-1,500, go Pentax K10D (which has won numerous "Expert" awards for what you get). If you want to drop sub-$600, go Pentax K100D.

Through July 31st, you can add the $220 DA 50-200 f/4-5.6 and increase the rebate from $50 to $150. That brings the price of the K100D system down to just over $500 for the body plus two (2) lens combo (18-55 plus 50-200).

What a cheap lens can give you (and not):
http://thebs413.blog spot.com/2007/06/what-cheap-lens-can-give-you-and-not.html

Question: Why do people like Pentax so much?
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/70042-post17.html

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk100d/page24.asp
dpreview gives it their seal of approval. I second that.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk100d/page24.asp
dpreview gives it their seal of approval. I second that.

All those in favor, say Aye.

aye.

great camera. particularly at this price point.

"This SLR features a CCD-shift image stabilization system, which allows you to take sharper photos at slower shutter speeds"

This is true only if your subject isn't moving.

I like mine quite well

#8 is a goddamn rocket scientist. Pin the genius badge on #8 - #12, will you do the honors?

#9, DSLR lenses are typically smaller apertures than point and shoots, since the point and shoots have small sensors so they can afford to have extremely large apertures. For example, my 3-generation-old Sony DSC-F717 is the equivalent of ~28-190mm zoom with f/2 at the wide end and f/2(point)4 at the long end. You'd have to spend thousands for a DSLR zoom at those apertures.

Yeah, your DSLR will acquire and shoot faster but the latest generation of high end point and shoots acquire focus extremely quickly and it's been at least 2-3 generations that have been able to shoot 3+ frames of burst. So... there are lots of advantages to DSLRs but point and shoots are very capable.

aye.

good info. thx all!

#12, there is nothing "effective" about their aperture. It's a real aperture size. Period. f/2 is f/2, no matter what the situation.

#15, please stop speaking. You're making my brain hurt.

There isn't a friggin' camera on the market that's f/8 at the long end of the zoom. At low ISOs, the compact point and shoots have excellent image quality, right up there with the consumer grade cameras and lenses in the DSLR market. And the digicams are actually typically at their best wide open - unlike your DA 50-200 which needs to be stopped down to gain its best sharpness.

No, compact cameras aren't as good as DSLRs when it comes to many things, especially high ISO and burst shooting. But you're just being stupid and clearly have very little knowledge of the actual market. Plenty of cameras have 1-2fps at full resolution and no mitigating "conditions." Reach and apertures aren't effective, they're real. Period.

Don't be a moron. kthxbye.

(a) DSLRs are more expensive and better at low light and high speed action.
(b) Higher -end point and shoots are cheaper and provide a lot of bang for the buck. For MOST people, the person's experience will make a bigger difference than the specifications. I have seen so many DSLRs on people who know only about specs and nothing else.
(c) P-shoots like Panasonic FZ50 series come with a Lekia lens, stabilizer, image preview, etc -- all for under $475. You can also shoot RAW and modify it.

Different strokes for different folks. Again, for the $ and convenience, higher end point-and-shoots are a great value.

(a) DSLRs are more expensive and better at low light and high speed action.
(b) Higher -end point and shoots are cheaper and provide a lot of bang for the buck. For MOST people, the person's experience will make a bigger difference than the specifications. I have seen so many DSLRs on people who know only about specs and nothing else.
(c) P-shoots like Panasonic FZ50 series come with a Lekia lens, stabilizer, image preview, etc -- all for under $475. You can also shoot RAW and modify it.

Different strokes for different folks. Again, for the $ and convenience, higher end point-and-shoots are a great value.

<table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>binaryvisions wrote:</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">There isn't a friggin' camera on the market that's f/8 at the long end of the zoom.</td> </tr></table><span class="postbody"> I noted several, major brand names/models that were f/8 at 300mm+ equivalent 35mm focal lengths.

<table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>binaryvisions wrote:</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">At low ISOs, the compact point and shoots have excellent image quality, right up there with the consumer grade cameras and lenses in the DSLR market.</td> </tr></table><span class="postbody"> I did not dispute that.
But we're often talking ISO80-200 max.
If you're so big on "speed" of a lens, then having a sensor that sucks at ISO400, or even 200, is not ideal.

<table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>binaryvisions wrote:</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">And the digicams are actually typically at their best wide open - unlike your DA 50-200 which needs to be stopped down to gain its best sharpness.</td> </tr></table><span class="postbody"> Whoa! I was comparing the DA 50-200 (76.5-306mm) at the long end, not wide!

First off, I will agree that most Point'n Shoots are "good" at 35mm equivalent focals.
Secondly, I would even agree that if you want a extensive zoom range (6-8x+), you should probably stay with Point'n Shoots, as you're going to give up image quality in a dSLR to get it. ... [Truncated]

<table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>junketcjunk wrote:</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">(c) P-shoots like Panasonic FZ50 series come with a Lekia lens, stabilizer, image preview, etc -- all for under $475. You can also shoot RAW and modify it.
Different strokes for different folks. Again, for the $ and convenience, higher end point-and-shoots are a great value.</td> </tr></table><span class="postbody"> Very much agreed!

First off, I'm the first person to swear by the quality of several Panasonic Point'n Shoots, from the sub-$200 6x models to the "bridge" $400+ models.
I also hold very high regard for some of the Sony H, Canon S, etc... models too.
Secondly, I regularly tell people who want a "single, superzoom lens" on a dSLR that they should just stay with a "high-end" Point'n Shoot.
It utterly defeats the purpose of going a dSLR.

But that's not what we're talking about here.
We're talking about myself, at an airshow, with other people trying to use their Point'n Shoots to get aircraft flying 300+ knots.
I was specifically talking about long end shooting, although I can easily argue about wide angle as well (especially sub-35mm equivalent).

Point'n Shoot users have off-set viewfinders (making it difficult to capture "in frame" at long ranges), half (or less) rates (for the first 5+ fames), far reduced image quality (let alone blur due to sub-ISO100, f/6.3 to 8.0+ aperture at 200-300mm+ equivalent), etc...
I myself ran into the same, damn frustrations with "late model," $300-400+ Point'n Shoots last year during the American football season -- and those were players slower than aircraft!

If you're going to do still photography, Point... [Truncated]