ist DS vs K100D

Just want to offer my impression on the DS. I just got one today as a backup to

my k100D...

There's no difference in image quality if you shoot RAW! Noise in RAW is the

same! My side by side comparison shows the RAW files are identical! However, jpg

is a different story, k100d is much better. As we all know, DS is known for

producing soft jpeg's.

The viewfinder on the DS is sooo much better than the K100D. Larger, brighter,

and more eye relief. I could NOT manual focus with K100D, but I could with DS.

That's the difference. The text at the bottom is much larger as well.

AF speed seems to be the same. Any improvements in k100d, if there are, were not

noticeable.

Build quality on the DS seems slightly better. Buttons feel softer, gap is

narrower.

The DS is slightly smaller than K100D. And I actually prefer the DS's grip

better than the K100D - less slip because 1, rubber feels less slippery and 2,

it curves more inward.

DS has larger RAW buffer, 5 vs 3.

Half press shutter button, DS has a distinct feel, K100D has soft. Press it

fully, DS requires less pressure than K100D.

They both have pretty loud shutter sound. Maybe DS seems slightly quieter.

That's all I can say for now.

Thanks David,

I decided to upgrade from my DS a few weeks ago and almost went with the K100 since the big thing that I wanted was the SR. The smaller pentamirror viewfinder had me worried though since I usually use old MF lenses so I bought the K10D instead...hoping it will be as good or better then the DS when it shows up.

Alan

I have one of each as well and pretty much agree with eveything you say. I wouldn't say you can't manually focus with the K100D, but it's certainly a little trickier and therefore probably slower. For this reason (and the SR), I tend to use the DS for wider lenses and the K100D for longer (shallower depth of field = easier to see where focus is). Neither camera has a great viewfinder compared to 30-year-old 35mm SLRs, but nor does any smaller sensor DSLR, such is progress. The build quality thing is marginal, neither camera is bad in this regard.

As for image quality in RAW, I can't tell any difference, either, they're both fine to my eye. I've made 18x12 prints I've been impressed by and find myself wondering how much advantage there really is from bigger pixel-count cameras.

I had a DL and just got a DS as a backup, I agree with the points made. On more plug for the DS, it uses TTL flash units (not just the newer P-TTL) and therefore has more dedicated flash options. Personally I just use old Vivitar 285s anyway, but it is good to know for future reference.

Ira