Reading mode: Light Dark

pentax DSLR getting heavy

Go to last post
distudio said:
parallaxproblem said:
Incidentally #2: I'm a bit sceptical about the need for the
bodies to get bigger. SR will take-up a few extra mm of thickness
but have they really not worked-out how to make savings to
compensate elsewhere in 18 months - I'm thinking about the K100D
and particularly the (non-SR equipped) K110D vs. the old *ist DL
here? I can't help thinking there may in fact be an element of
that 'Canon Thing' about bigger, Pro bodies being more 'impressive'
  • mobile phones have been getting bigger for similar (ie. often
non-technical) reasons for the last few years now!
Click to expand...
Just take a look at some of the internal shots of the K100D, there
is far more than just a few mm required to implement in-body SR in
the efficient, reliable and effective manner that they have.
Click to expand...
I even commented on the shots of the SR mechanism when they were published in this forum, and I was thinking specifically of this when I wrote what I did

I don't see how the horizontal or vertical directions have any bearing on camera size:
  • In terms of HEIGHT, the mount diameter is much greater than the sensor hight and there is at least 1cm between the bottom of the mount and the bottom of the camera on the DS/DL of extra space
  • In terms of WIDTH there is plenty of spare space available in this dimension as provided by the form factor of DSLR cameras
  • The only thing which might increase is the THICKNESS of the camera to allow for the 'float' between the sensor platform and the exterior 'caddy'
Furthermore, my current understanding is that the SR-less K110D will be the same size as the K100D - how does one explain that? Pentax being lazy with the body moldings? The DS and DL had different body shells (even though they looked the same at first glance) - can't Pentax do the same for the K100D and the K110D?

Just to show that this (marketing?) trend is not limited to Pentax, one might also notice that the Sony A100 is (needlessly) bigger than its KM5D parent - 10MP needs 'more space' than 6MP? LOL! (please - no suggestions that 'more circuitry' is needed)

I have to say I personally am rather surprised by the 'open-arms' with which many existing Pentax owners posting on this forum are greeting the relatively large size of the K10D (more-or-less Nikon D80 size, from what I understand) - kind of makes me wonder a little why they bought into the brand in the first place!

Regards!
 
Note that the D was 55 grams heavier than the DS. Pentax mid- and upper-level bodies have traditionally weighed more than the entry level bodies, dating back to the film days. It's due to better (sturdier) build quality and added features. Pentax bodies are no bigger than they need to be.

If the K10D weighs a few more grams in return for a sturdier build, a pentaprism, weather sealing, etc., that's a worthwhile tradeoff IMO. If those few grams are a problem then keep your DS/DL for those times when it matters.
--
Jim King - Retired Colormonger - Suburban Detroit, Michigan, USA; GMT -4h (EDT)



* * * * *
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
  • Sir Winston Churchill
* * * * *
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.
  • Albert Einstein
 
parallaxproblem said:
I even commented on the shots of the SR mechanism when they were
published in this forum, and I was thinking specifically of this
when I wrote what I did

I don't see how the horizontal or vertical directions have any
bearing on camera size:
  • In terms of HEIGHT, the mount diameter is much greater than the
sensor hight and there is at least 1cm between the bottom of the
mount and the bottom of the camera on the DS/DL of extra space
  • In terms of WIDTH there is plenty of spare space available in
this dimension as provided by the form factor of DSLR cameras
  • The only thing which might increase is the THICKNESS of the
camera to allow for the 'float' between the sensor platform and the
exterior 'caddy'
Click to expand...
If care to compare the K100D chassis with the *ist D it can be easily seen that the area behind the mount has been substantially increased in width and height in order to accommodate the four linear motors. The assembly has the scope to move about 10ml total latterally or vertically, the *ist D and it's other non-SR siblings didn;t need to accommodate this.
parallaxproblem said:
Furthermore, my current understanding is that the SR-less K110D
will be the same size as the K100D - how does one explain that?
Pentax being lazy with the body moldings? The DS and DL had
different body shells (even though they looked the same at first
glance) - can't Pentax do the same for the K100D and the K110D?
Click to expand...
Most definitely, there is no way they would produce a new moulding for such a model (ie one where they have simply removed options) just like they have apparently filled the power zoom contacts which were obviously not required on this body but are obviously a shared moulding.
parallaxproblem said:
Just to show that this (marketing?) trend is not limited to Pentax,
one might also notice that the Sony A100 is (needlessly) bigger
than its KM5D parent - 10MP needs 'more space' than 6MP? LOL!
(please - no suggestions that 'more circuitry' is needed)
Click to expand...
Are they using the same pistonic AS motors as were developed for use in the KM5D ?
parallaxproblem said:
I have to say I personally am rather surprised by the 'open-arms'
with which many existing Pentax owners posting on this forum are
greeting the relatively large size of the K10D (more-or-less Nikon
D80 size, from what I understand) - kind of makes me wonder a
little why they bought into the brand in the first place!
Click to expand...
Given that a lot of us have been with Pentax from the film days and were prepared to tote about 67 and 645 systems in order to achieve the quality that we desired I am not surprised. The minuscule increase in size and weight couldn't bother me less. Let's face it, it's hardly going to make a difference when the body is hanging off my A*300/2.8 is it?

--
Rob

 
no text
 
the K100D and K10D both feature SR, and a newer befer metal frame (K100D is a modified DS/DL frame) also the shel materals are better, stronger etc.

For the K100D vs DS/DL its a whole wopping 3.4oz more wow, take the neck strap off and use lythus if you want tho get the extra weight off. ITS NOT THAT MUCH!!!

Now the K10D, no its not as light as any of the prev. D's but it has (or is reported to have) metal frame, AND skin (means super strong body) Weather sealing, physicaly biger than other bodies, better AF, probaly a better shutter box (shutter, mirror etc.), a pentaprism (solid glass compaired to mirrors) the posability of a new batttery type (should be stronger than AA's) etc.

People on the K100D dont have room to complain, on the K10D, theirs a little, but its still the lightest in its class (I think though the D80 is like 2-oz lighter, but is missing var. features) Heck it is probaly still lighter than your old film rigs with the equv. amount of film that you get in a 2gig card actualy it is... that many frames/roles of film is a few pounds

Deal is PENTAX still makes some of the highest quality products and sometimes they can not keep the smallest, lightest, cheepest price point without sacrificing something.

Deal with it folks.you cant have the world all the time. Now go out and LBA yourself a Limited or Pancake or tow and relax.

--
I Want my, I want my , I want my K10D
(oh and of course Get MY money for nothin and chicks for free :)
 
(including batteries)
400d 556gr 127x94x65
DL 565gr 125x93x66
DS 605gr 125x93x66
A100 638gr 133x95x71
K100D 660gr 129x93x70
D80 668gr 132x103x70
K10D 785gr 141x101x70 (rumour)
30d 785gr 144x106x74
D200 920gr 147x113x74

I like small and light too, looking at the table I think the K100D is well within the limits for me. But the extra size and 180gr for a K10D I absolutely would notice in the field, and also shooting people on holiday is a little less 'relaxed' when you point a bigger camera at them. I'm not really sure I want to go that way, I have no intentions at being a pro. Still hoping Pentax will announce a higher specced K100D with larger buffer and .95 viewfinder magnification.
--
Menno
 
I don't care about weight. Camera weight is just something that can steady the shot more to me. My brother, Kirk Gittings, carries a 4x5 plus tripod and film packs all over the Southwest for his business including hiking to remote Native American sites. If you want to see what he hikes around with check out the new fall issue of Freestyle Photographic Supplies as he is the featured pro on the cover. He has a show coming up soon at the Creative Center for Photography in Hollywood if anyone is interested.

My last film camera was a Minolta Maxxum 9 + VC-9 grip, I used regularly for motorsports and wildlife. I want the weight to balance out a 300/2.8 or longer on a monopod. I'm still using my *ist D + vertical grip till either Pentax comes out with another metal frame camera with seals, vertical grip, and 10MP plus or I have to switch brands again. I don't have an interest in anything Pentax has out currently unless I wanted to buy a K100D for just shooting around with. I weaned my wife away from her Minolta XTsi + Tamron 24-135 with a Pentax Optio A10. But I still have a few Minolta/Konica/Sony lenses left (no long teles though) so hurryup Pentax before I end up buying a Sony A100.

Kent Gittings
 
Brendan PK said:
Now the K10D, no its not as light as any of the prev. D's but it
has (or is reported to have) metal frame, AND skin (means super
strong body) Weather sealing, physicaly biger than other bodies,
better AF, probaly a better shutter box (shutter, mirror etc.), a
pentaprism (solid glass compaired to mirrors) the posability of a
new batttery type (should be stronger than AA's) etc.
Click to expand...
I suspect it will have pretty much the same construction as all the other Pentax DSLRs, there may be weather sealing but this would account for only a few grams at most. I don't expect more than a pressed metal chassis and polycarbonate body panels. The battery will likely be between the weight of a set of L-ion AA and Ni-MH rechargeable cells. My guess is that the extra volume may be filled with something other than air :-)

--
Rob

 
Jonas B said:
I have read 710 grams which is something I don't care about. But
having to buy new thicker bags is another thing. Not the worlds
end, I know, but I hope the K10D doesn't increase in height (I have
the camera with the lens pointing downwards in my favourite small
bag now).
Anyone knowing anything, or any possibly hints available? Height
embargo?

--
thank you,

Jonas
Click to expand...
I know I will have to reorganize my bag anyway, 'cause I'll be getting it with the grip I think...

Wim

--
Belgium, GMT+1

 
Back to the days of my SFXn... I never found it a problem to carry around, though the DS being lighter was nice. I guess the K10D's weight will be closer to the SFXn?

I think I'll just get another strap for the K10D, one that distributes the weight better. But perhaps Pentax will provide a new strap?

I wonder, does the K100D come with the same strap as the *istDx series?

Wim

--
Belgium, GMT+1

 
mvb123 said:
I like small and light too, looking at the table I think the K100D
is well within the limits for me. But the extra size and 180gr for
a K10D I absolutely would notice in the field, and also shooting
people on holiday is a little less 'relaxed' when you point a
bigger camera at them. I'm not really sure I want to go that way, I
have no intentions at being a pro. Still hoping Pentax will
announce a higher specced K100D with larger buffer and .95
viewfinder magnification.
--
Menno
Click to expand...
same feelings here.

I wish the K10D will be a winner, for a while at least, but for my needs and pocket I am looking towards 10MP K200d or K300d, whenever it comes. I hope it will stay as light and small as the K100d.

Joe
 
silkmouse said:
Harri R'is'nen said:
I have been regularly, yearly, hiking in wilderness since 12 years
old ( it was more than thirty years ago ) mostly 6 to 7 days or
longer treks, and 95 g difference in camera weight hasnt been
exhausted me yet. Not even if it comes in addition of backpack
containing weeks food and camping stuff.

I do not bother to mention all those day trips in this contex.......
Click to expand...
good for you!
last month I went hiking at Mt. Rainier. when I left the parking
lot, i have the camera in a small powepro bag, two bottles of
water, three apples in my back-bag. i put the bag on my back and
felt this is pretty light.
after 5 hours of hiking, i finished the water & appples, but i felt
the bag was 10 times heavier than before!

:)
:)
Click to expand...
In July I was in Austria making day/half day trips to mountains. Having rainsuit,water and some snacks in my small packback I wore fotowest. In west pockest I had 24-90, 360FGZ, spare batteries, cleaning equipment, CF-cards etc. essentials. I had *ist D with vertical grip and 20-30/4 attached in my hand/hanging in my neck.

Of course I got a liittle bit exhausted during climbing, but if something have to be abandoned, it is ten kilos from my waist, not 95g from my foto eguipments..... :-)

--
Harri
 
HOW DARE YOU tell me to 'deal with it'?????!!!!!!

There is somewhat 'fascist' tendency in this forum at times, with a seeming expectency on the part of a few that everybody needs to 'conform' to whatever they consider to be the 'standard' line

IF I DON'T WANT TO BUY THE K10D BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT'S TOO BIG, AND I CHOOSE TO EXPRESS THIS THEN YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TELL ME TO EITHER 'STOP' OR TO 'DEAL WITH IT'

The original posting, and the subsequent discussion are perfectly legitimate for a Pentax Technical Discussion forum. If you would prefer something else then form a 'Pentax Fan Club'!

I bought the DS for a number of reasons - one of which was small size

'Features' are of secondary importance to me as I currently also have a KM 7D which frankly wipes-the-floor with the DS in most respects (as it should being a 'semi-pro' level camera ) except for size. There are also many competent and 'feature-packed', but larger, DSLRs available from other manufacturers

My current reasons for saying with the Pentax are:
  • Prime lenses (when available) with good backwards-compatiblity
  • Size (for travelling)
  • Commitment to customer-base via firmware-upgrades for older models and backwards-compatible SR functions
If the K10D is the size of the Nikon D80, as I expect, then I will NOT be buying it, PERIOD. IT'S NOT FOR YOU TO TELL ME TO DO OTHERWISE NOR TO DENY ME FROM EXPRESSING THIS on the forum, unless I break forum rules by 'bashing'
 
parallaxproblem said:
There is somewhat 'fascist' tendency in this forum at times, with a
Click to expand...
Think of Godwin's law, you came very close ;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
parallaxproblem said:
IF I DON'T WANT TO BUY THE K10D BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT'S TOO BIG, AND
I CHOOSE TO EXPRESS THIS THEN YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TELL ME TO
EITHER 'STOP' OR TO 'DEAL WITH IT'
Click to expand...
But now you're telling him what to express or not to express..
In such a situation IMHO it would be better to just ignore the post.
--
Menno
 
distudio said:
If care to compare the K100D chassis with the *ist D it can be
easily seen that the area behind the mount has been substantially
increased in width and height in order to accommodate the four
linear motors. The assembly has the scope to move about 10ml total
latterally or vertically, the *ist D and it's other non-SR siblings
didn;t need to accommodate this.
Click to expand...
I measure 31mm from the middle of the K-mount to the bottom of my DS which I think is the constraining dimension here (there is more space above the sensor and plenty each side). Does the SR mechanism have a physical height greater than 62mm? If not then I don't see why either camera needs to be bigger. I certainly can't see why the SR cameras need to be wider
distudio said:
distudio said:
Furthermore, my current understanding is that the SR-less K110D
will be the same size as the K100D - how does one explain that?
Pentax being lazy with the body moldings? The DS and DL had
different body shells (even though they looked the same at first
glance) - can't Pentax do the same for the K100D and the K110D?
Click to expand...
Most definitely, there is no way they would produce a new moulding
for such a model (ie one where they have simply removed options)
just like they have apparently filled the power zoom contacts which
were obviously not required on this body but are obviously a shared
moulding.
Click to expand...
But they did for the DL... this has a different body moulding from the DS even though there are in some repsects fewer differences between those two cameras...
distudio said:
distudio said:
Just to show that this (marketing?) trend is not limited to Pentax,
one might also notice that the Sony A100 is (needlessly) bigger
than its KM5D parent - 10MP needs 'more space' than 6MP? LOL!
(please - no suggestions that 'more circuitry' is needed)
Click to expand...
Are they using the same pistonic AS motors as were developed for
use in the KM5D ?
Click to expand...
I know the system has been tuned/modified, but I believe the base-technology is the same
distudio said:
distudio said:
I have to say I personally am rather surprised by the 'open-arms'
with which many existing Pentax owners posting on this forum are
greeting the relatively large size of the K10D (more-or-less Nikon
D80 size, from what I understand) - kind of makes me wonder a
little why they bought into the brand in the first place!
Click to expand...
Given that a lot of us have been with Pentax from the film days and
were prepared to tote about 67 and 645 systems in order to achieve
the quality that we desired I am not surprised.
Click to expand...
My film days were (still are!) based-around Minolta X700/X500, sure I'm a much less advanced user than yourself, but I also got used to carrying kit of a certain size which even then I often found annoying. The 350D and DS/DL were the only bodies that offered a similar camera body size to my X700, which is what encouraged me to buy a DSLR and basically directed me to Pentax (also the lenses). If you want the best quality, and don't care about size (a la 67 and 645 system) then the Canon 5D & 1DII surely offer this at the moment, or maybe the 645D when it arrives
distudio said:
The minuscule
increase in size and weight couldn't bother me less. Let's face it,
it's hardly going to make a difference when the body is hanging off
my A*300/2.8 is it?
Click to expand...
Not for you, maybe, but I am currently very happy with my ability to squeeze my DS and set of small primes into a small case for weekends-away and holidays (I would be even happier if I could replace the D16-45 with a couple of smaller primes at the wide-end). The size of smaller cases will be constrained by at least one dimension of the camera - height or width - if that increases then so does the required size of the case. I'm seriously considering getting a second DS, while it's still just possible to find one new, as the size of K100D and K10D appear to be real deterrents to me

Horses for courses!

Regards!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top