Pentax K100D vs. Nikon 40D vs. Canon XTi

[Gintaras]

hi chaps,
i am preparing to step into DSLR world and upgrade from my Sony 717 to something more serious.

as of present, after reading plenty of reviews and forums, my choices narrowed to Pentax K100D, Nikon 40 and Canon XTi... each of them has its good and bad.

still this is difficult choice and i would like to learn opinions of forum members as to which camera might be right for me.

For me big must(s) would be:
a) image quality under any light condition, low noise all way trough ISO 400 and may be 800
b) fast shot to shot speeds (except for continous mode for which i do not care)
c) easy in use (but not necessaril a dummy as i am fairly tech literate so need not be expained simple things)
d) price range 600-1000$

honestly speaking i like Pentax satbilisation system, built quality, and price... it seems pix quality is also rated veru high.
i still like Canon smooth handling and quality, and find it almost an icon of quality in DSLR world.
i respect and like Nikon sharpness and many other things, though D80 is bit big to me while D40 lacks motor for lenses, which i think is not an issue right now but can become an issue as long as i would grow into this camera.

So... please help me with some hintsights.

i hope Andy and John Reed are still around here as i found their comments always HIGHLY helpful. they might remember me for my Q to Coolpix 885 and Sony 717... yep i had weird handle here at that time so they might not recognise me straight on. :-)

and i am sure here gather many guys and gals with deep knowledge who can help me to make my choice.

NB: take into account i am strongly compelled by Pentax but am not sure IF or not should get it.

THANKS in advance

[Gintaras]

6Mp or 10Mp would not matter much to me as i am not printing overly large photos.

my budget is expandable but i would not like going above 1000$ unless for very strong reason. max limit would be 1300$. as i am reside in Europe this would be about 1000 Euros. to give U some idea, XTi with kit lenses costs 699E, D40 with kit 599E, Pentax k100 with kit about 640E... i know european prices for such things are a rip off compared to what one can get for in the US.

what about bulky? i understand no DSLR is compact (so no pocket) camera but i would vote for something a bit smaller than usual to carry on, and still quality built piece, speaking of which XTi feels too plasticky and not robust to me. Best hand feel for me are D40 and k100...

lenses? i had no DSLR cam before so have no lense kits to speak of...

yep, hope i did not miss anything in this post.

[SpecialK]

Hi Gintaras:

I looked at the Canon XTi and Nikon D80 before buying the Pentax K100D. The Canonikons are nice but fairly expensive systems.

I suggest looking at the lenses you want first, then work backward to the body. Many of the Canonikon lenses will run over $1,000, and if you want 3 or more (don't we all?) that will be sizeable investment, quick.

The Pentax K100D stabilization is in the camera which means many third-party lenses such as Sigma or Tamron can be used without the extra expense of the in-lens IS. There is an argument to how effective each system is, but you can read that elsewhere.

As examples, the 10-17 fisheye was $320 after rebate, the 18-50 was $375 (now discontinued and about $300), the 50-200 was $170 after rebate, and the 70-300 was $229 or so. I just splurged and ordered a 12-24 for $615 after rebate. Whether they have the highest top-notch image quality is debatable, but they all have good reviews. I am not saying you need all these lenses, but it shows the variety available at reasonable prices.

The only true limitation (for some people) of the K100D is the small buffer, which allows you to shoot bursts of only 5 jpgs or 3 RAW in a row. I do not shoot sports and that is not a limitation for me. Also, the auto-white balance works down to about 4000K, below which you should go to the tungsten setting. However, I shoot RAW, so again, that is no limitation.

[coldrain]

For those prices, the Canon XTi is probably the best choice quality wise.
The K100D is a nice camera too, its IS an advantage and its 6mp a downside.
The D40 is the least attractive, it is a very cut down camera, with its missing internal motor making good lens selection VERY expensive and some important features missing.

What is said above about lens prices is sort of mis-information.
Good lenses from Pentax are expensive, just as they are for Nikon or Canon.
From above examples, Tokina has that 10-17mm fisheye (you probably will not want this lens anyway), the 18-50 f2.8 Sigma is the same price for Nikon, Canon and Pentax, the 55-200 from Canon is not more expensive and optically a bit better than that pentax, and the 70-300 APO DG Sigma mentioned again is teh same for Pentax, Canon and Nikon.
None of these lenses is super special either.
The 12-24mm mentioned is the Pentax version of the Tokina 12-24mm f4 lens, and the Tokina you can find a bit cheaper anyway.

The XTi is very robust btw, just the plastic is a harder "quality" than that of the Pentax. I got the XT for its size and weight, and I throw it into a backpack to take along all the time... it is robust alright. The XTi's AF system is by far the best of these 3 too. The XTi and D40 are the same size and weight, the K100D is a bit bigger (but not all that much) and heavier.

If you want IS on the Canon, get the great Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM. It is a very sharp lens upto the corners, it is sharp upto 300mm, and has good contrast and colour. This lens has no competition for the Pentax, the best you can do is the Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO DG Macro, which does not perform nearly as good (but costs half).
IS of course is of most use in longer focal lengths.

Speed and burst mode on the XTi is best.

I'd say, don't fall into the D40 trap. And choose between the Pentax and the Canon.

[SpecialK]

The K100D is a nice camera too, its IS an advantage and its 6mp a downside.
...
What is said above about lens prices is sort of mis-information.


6MP is not necessarily a disadvantage. In fact many K10D (10MP) users claim the K100D has better low light perfomance in part due to that.

I suggested comparing Canikon lens prices. You compared other brands. Obviously Sigmas are the same price for all of the mounts...

[coldrain]

6MP is not necessarily a disadvantage. In fact many K10D (10MP) users claim the K100D has better low light perfomance in part due to that.

I suggested comparing Canikon lens prices. You compared other brands. Obviously Sigmas are the same price for all of the mounts...
I know the prices of Sigmas, Tamrons are the same, that is my point.
You say that Canon and Nikon lenses can get expensive and that pentax will be a lot cheaper.

Well, you give Sigma examples.

Now lets look at a few Pentax examples then.

Pentax 35mm f2 : $300
Nikon 35mm f2: $320
Canon 35mm f2: $230

Pentax 100mm f2.8 macro: $440
Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR macro: $770
Canon 100mm f2.8 macro: $470

Pentax 77mm f1.8: $690
Canon 85mm f1.8: $340
Nikon 85mm f1.8: $400

Pentax 300mm f2.8: $4355
Nikon 300mm f2.8: $4500
Canon 300mm f2.8 IS USM: $3900

Just a few examples from the same supplier (B&H). They do not have many Pentax lens offerings, I just picked a few and looked up comparable Canon and Nikon lenses. Now, you can not really say Pentax is a lot cheaper, now can you? Good pentax lenses are expensive, simple as that.

And about 6 vs 10mp, it actually is quite a big difference, and very noticable when you want/have to crop. And the XTi is not really a bad performer in low light, now is it?

[lucav]

i know european prices for such things are a rip off compared to what one can get for in the US.


Have a look at Swiss prices: they are lower; VAT is very low (7.5%) and we have a strong Euro now.
Taking all this together you could save something.
You just need to be careful about import taxes, but that depends on your country.

A rather good site seems to be http://www.toppreise.ch/
The "price history" feature is rather handy, too (the K100 in particular is getting cheaper fast).

I am exactly in your situation, btw, but have the D50 in instead of the D40.
My ideal camera would be an xti/400d with in body stabilization, which I guess will never happen.

Bye,
Luca

[SpecialK]

I know the prices of Sigmas, Tamrons are the same, that is my point.
You say that Canon and Nikon lenses can get expensive and that pentax will be a lot cheaper.


I think you missed the point which perhaps I did not make very clear. I said third party lenses are cheaper, such as Sigma - not Pentax (for the benefit of the in-body stabilization) versus Canikons and the lens-stabilization prices. I bet that most Canikon body owners would put Canikon lenses on them, which is why I suggests looking at those first.

"not necessarily." It means not in every case.

The XTi is nice - I almost bought one.

[fionndruinne]

As far as the D40 goes, you need to decide for yourself if 3 AF points and no internal focus motor constitutes a "very cut down" camera. It is less expensive, and top quality, so you could save some money for another lens... the XTi won't be providing you with any better of a kit lens than the D40 will, and I've heard opinions that the Nikon's kit glass is slightly better.

I don't want to start the back-and-forth about this camera again, but don't discount it because it has some detractors. Reviews have been overwhelmingly positive.

(coldrain hates it, it seems)

[coldrain]

As far as the D40 goes, you need to decide for yourself if 3 AF points and no internal focus motor constitutes a "very cut down" camera. It is less expensive, and top quality, so you could save some money for another lens... the XTi won't be providing you with any better of a kit lens than the D40 will, and I've heard opinions that the Nikon's kit glass is slightly better.

I don't want to start the back-and-forth about this camera again, but don't discount it because it has some detractors. Reviews have been overwhelmingly positive.

(coldrain hates it, it seems)
reviews have been pointing out that it is a nice camera for people who will not go beyond a kit lens or two and do not mind missing features. No review has pointed out it is the better choice for anyone else.

The opinions of that the Nikon's kit glass is slightly better... who cares? Again, only for people who just want a kit lens also in future.
The Canon kit lens is better with vignetting, distortion and even CA.
The Nikon kitlens is better in contrast and a bit in resolution, as far as I know.

Reviews of all 3 cameras have been positive, and no comparative serious review exists that puts the D40 in front. The XTi gets rated at the same level (ColorFoto) or a bit higher (Mac Welt) in serious comparative reviews as the D80.

I don't hate a D40, I dislike that some people want to push the D40 onto everyone, and try to minimize the real down sides to the D40 (where it has no real upside). You can not use the small price difference as arguement, it will be a lot more expensive in every other way, from getting a better lens than the kitlens, to shooting RAW.

[Gintaras]

Thanks a LOT everyone,

I found all your postings informative and highly helpful. Also big thanks for suggesting me CH web shop for buying, I will take a look at this.

Now speaking about cameras.
I think I am leaning more to Canon XTi now, which has 10Mp (not big deal but a nice extra) and as it seems Canon also has far more expandability options (a big factor to consider) compared to Pentax.

Pentax might be second on my list in case I decide I need IS system very much and like a few other things about it. Reviews have been very favorable for this camera both on dpreview.com and here.

From Nikons as it looks the good choice could be D70 instead of D40 but then this baby is fairly bulky and Nikon seems more expensive on expandability. The other downside for me is Nikon's mediocre service in Austria where I currently reside. I had poor experience with service with my ages old CP885 which I nearly forgotten. Luckily that problem in CP was not a big deal but then everyone prefers good service over poor.

WISH U a GREAT DAY PALS

[swgod98]

I don't hate a D40, I dislike that some people want to push the D40 onto everyone, and try to minimize the real down sides to the D40 (where it has no real upside).

I don't remember anyone pushing the D40 on people. What I have seen is people suggesting it as an option for those asking about it. Who's to say the D40 isn't the right camera for someone? Us? I don't think so. Only the buyer can decide that. We can only give our opinions. So, why not offer up options we might think are good for the buyer? Nobody has ever hid the fact that the D40 lacks a focusing motor.

Yes, sometimes people do minimize the down sides of the D40, because some people exaggerate them. There needs to be a balance that nobody can agree upon.

You have already stated yourself that there ARE people the D40 will be good for. And I can guarantee you there are hundreds, probably thousands of happy D40 owners out there right now.

I agree (overall), the XTi and K100D are better choices. But, that is for the buyer to decide, because there are benefits to buying/owning the D40 as well. They've been stated before, a number of times.

[coldrain]

The over and over stated benifit of a D40 is... cost. And that is just nor true anyway. It will cost more, when you will want to upgrade from the kitlens stuff. And when you want to take advantage of RAW. And the K100D is the least expensive of the three anyway.

[swgod98]

The $200 price difference is not the only benefit. So, I will explain them again for those who keep conveniently forgetting them...

1) Price (beats XTi by about $200, nearly identical to K100D)
2) Unobtrusive AF assist lamp (instead of AF flash assist the other 2 use)
3) Lighter body (than both)
4) Larger grip (than XTi)
5) Better, more solid body construction (than XTi)
6) Better battery life (than XTi, not sure on K100D, but that uses AA's)
7) A bunch of in camera editing "toys"
8) Excellent noise levels (beating K100D, comparable to XTi)
9) Larger buffer (than K100D)
10) Spot metering (XTi lacks)
11) Auto ISO (I believe XTi and K100D both lack this)

I doubt this list is complete...these are just things off the top of my head. The point is, there are benefit(s). The importance of each of these benefit(s) are up to each individual person. So, to say there are none is merely a personal opinion which should not be stated as fact.

[fionndruinne]

Yes, sometimes people do minimize the down sides of the D40, because some people exaggerate them. There needs to be a balance that nobody can agree upon.

Very true, I agree there wholeheartedly.

That is a good features list, as well. I've already pointed out that Nikon is making new lenses for this type of camera, such as the new mid-grade 55-200VR - talk about upgradability? As soon as the new lens comes out, you will be able to buy the D40 and the 55-200VR for only about $50 more than the XTi.

Now I know this is not the best possible rig, but some of us just don't have the money for an XTi or a D80 + lenses; no way, no how. Would you rather we remained trapped in the P&S world, then? Or bought an inexpensive, top-quality camera that will allow us to shoot a hundredfold better than we did before?

[DonSchap]

Very true, I agree there wholeheartedly.

That is a good features list, as well. I've already pointed out that Nikon is making new lenses for this type of camera, such as the new mid-grade 55-200VR - talk about upgradability? As soon as the new lens comes out, you will be able to buy the D40 and the 55-200VR for only about $50 more than the XTi.

Now I know this is not the best possible rig, but some of us just don't have the money for an XTi or a D80 + lenses; no way, no how. Would you rather we remained trapped in the P&S world, then? Or bought an inexpensive, top-quality camera that will allow us to shoot a hundredfold better than we did before?

Look, $1500 can get you started ... you just need to consider a few more variables. :D

The DSLR-World awaits those ready to abandon P&S. You can even do it with in-the-body-IS, in some cases. Just reach deep and pony up the cash. Mow an extra lawn or two, it's springtime!

[fionndruinne]

I am trying to balance the camera against other important purchases/expenses, such as working on a car (then finding a decent job when my current work runs out, so i may - hopefully - afford an apartment in not-so-expensive Oregon south coast). It's not the best time to buy one, well I know it, but I need something to keep me active in the semi-downtimes. Otherwise I tend to lose the impetus altogether; it's one of my faults.

What are the sort of variables I should be looking at?

[DonSchap]

After you obtain the TAMRON AF18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 XR DiII LD Apherical (IF) lens, on whatever body you decide upon, you need to really begin to consider the focal ranges you will be doing your shooting in. This is where you need to concentrate your decisions for your very next lens.

To compensate for the shortened wide-angle of the APS-C Sensor-based camera (that's just about every DSLR short of $3000), I wound up getting an 11-18mm f/4.5-5.6 Zoom. There are 12-24mm f/4 Zooms and 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 Zooms. I just found it hard to take room-sized shots with more than 18mm.

People who are outdoors, may want to extend their reach beyond 250mm ... so their next lens may be the Tokina AF 840 80-400mm f/4-5.6 telephoto. This is a tremendous lens and offers some real reach, without compromising too much light. It won't break the bank like a Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM might.

Then ... there are those who shoot a lot of indoor shots, where flash isn't always welcome or appreciated. For them (the "f/2.8-crowd"), you need something close-up ... and last year, a slew of 17-50mm focal range came into vogue.

For those who might be looking to take serious indoor-shooting from across the crowded floor, there is the gem of f/2.8 lenses, the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. There are other non-IS offerings, in this focal-range, but if you are looking at this lens .... IMO, there just isn't anything else out there worth a shot. LOL. Spend the money and enjoy this puppy!

These are a fistful of your ... "other considerations" ... that may be cause for pause. Just get your 18-250mm utility-lens to start you off ... and decide from there. You will be well-covered, in the beginning, both upper and lower.

Remember to take notes on shortfalls and make a good list of what MORE you want from your lensing.

Like they say: "From here we build."

[SpecialK]

Auto ISO (I believe XTi and K100D both lack this)



The K100D has 4 choices for the auto-ISO range (200-400, 200-800, 200-1600, 200-3200), just for the record.

[coldrain]

1) Price (beats XTi by about $200, nearly identical to K100D)
Just looking at one and the same supplier (B&H):
XTi (10mp) + 18-55 = $770 (has RAW convertor standard)
D40X (10mp) + 18-55 = $800 + Nikon RAW convertor = $950
D40 (6mp) + 18-55 = $550 + Nikon RAW convertor = $700
K100D (6mp) + 18-55 = $500 (has RAW convertor standard)
Now imagine you want to upgrade the kitlens to a higher quality lens. OUCH.

2) Unobtrusive AF assist lamp (instead of AF flash assist the other 2 use)
If flash is of concern to you you need an external flash anyway, so you dont get those awful frontal flash photos. If you have a bit too wide lens the Nikon assist light will be blocked. Then it is a negative all of a sudden.

3) Lighter body (than both)
Almost EXACTLY the same weight as the XTi (D40: 524 grams. XTi: 556 grams. (both 1.2 lb for the americans).). Both measured with memory card and battery.

4) Larger grip (than XTi)

5) Better, more solid body construction (than XTi)
It is not more solid, You may like the texture of the plastics more, but the XTi is as solid.

6) Better battery life (than XTi, not sure on K100D, but that uses AA's)
7) A bunch of in camera editing "toys"
8) Excellent noise levels (beating K100D, comparable to XTi)
The K100D is actually very good at high ISO. Very comparable to the D40.

9) Larger buffer (than K100D)
10) Spot metering (XTi lacks)
The D40 meters 3% in the center, the XTi meters 9% in the center. That is the difference, not the lack of "spot metering".

11) Auto ISO (I believe XTi and K100D both lack this)
Both XTi and K100D have auto ISO functions.

I doubt this list is complete...these are just things off the top of my head. The point is, there are benefit(s). The importance of each of these benefit(s) are up to each individual person. So, to say there are none is merely a personal opinion which should not be stated as fact.
Now go make such a list for the K100D and the XTi. You will find more things the D40 lacks, and more plusses on the other two cameras.

And the point is, the missing features of the D40 are a bigger deal than the "plusses". Especially money wise.
All will impact your photography (limitted lens choice, no white balance and exposure bracketing, low end AF system, no mirror lock up), while "bigger grip", "nicer plastics", "editing toys" and such will not.

So, yes, I will not advice someone a D40, and will give the reasons why, according to me, it is not a good choice. Unless they are the proverbial "soccer mom" snapshooters that will be happy with a 2 kitlens system.
And the OP does not seem to be that kind of person.

[Gintaras]

guys, stop arguing, every camera has its strong and weak spots...
i admit D40 is very good and in reviews they say many good things about this.
i personally do not like Nikon processing which makes colours over saturated, esp reds which is what distructed me with Cp885. Noise is as it looks better handled down on Canon, pix posted in reviews for Nikon and Pentax are a bit (but not terribly) noiser. In any case it looks hard to notice those faults at Iso lower than 800.

on the rest, Canon Xti is appealing for its size and quality, Pentax for its features and price, not mention surprising good quality too (vs. Ist D which seems like was a lemon to some extent).

D40 is something like compromised D80 or D70... in which case D70 is more appealing when one does not mind its size and weight.

All in all it boils down to personal choices where i am afraid you find no friends as what is good for one might be not good for the other.

Cheers & once again thanks for very informative postings.

[swgod98]

Sorry Ginataras, but people need to know the untwisted truth.

.

As always, you're right coldrain :rolleyes:

I'm done.