Do some research first please.pros and cons please.![]()
Since the E-500 has been discontinued and its replacement, the E-510 has shake reduction in the body plus 10 MP and Live View, I don't think it's much of a question now.E500 high-end? Not now I guess. But it definitely has more megapixels.
If you're planning to do larger prints then Oly E500 has the edge for sure. It has also anti-dust features, which the K100D lacks. Crop factor 2x though. Li-on battery.
k100D has anti-shake, is the newer model, is cheaper, uses AA batteries, crop factor 1.5x. I can safely say that the noise performance is also a lot better. But only has 6 MGP compared to E500's 8.
Both have their pros and cons - it's just whether you can live with the cons in exchange for the pros. Shrug.
would you care to explain these 2 statements?what made me decide not to go with Olympus is the pathetic viewfinder and the 2X crop factor of the sensor. :thumbsd:
apologies. i had already done my research... i can practically name the specs by heart. i wanted a third person perspective on the scenario..Do some research first please.
Look on DPreview please.
Don't be lazy and expect everyone to do the research for you please.
Also consider the K10D and the E300 series since the E500 is more high-end while the K100D is a lower model.
Hi bro,apologies. i had already done my research... i can practically name the specs by heart. i wanted a third person perspective on the scenario..
i chose these two because of budget constraints...sadly. i am leaning towards the E500 since it seems to handle better and has the sswf, but the K100D has in-camera SR.
If I may, it's not so much a crop factor as most people say but more precisely a 35mm effective focal length multiplier for the 4/3 lenses. Since the lenses and the bodies were designed for each other, I don't see the mismatch indicated by a crop factor as there is with putting a 35mm lens on a digital body without a full-frame sensor.would you care to explain these 2 statements?
As I know there is NO crop factor if you use 4/3 system only in OM lenses or any other 35mm lenses. :dunno:
PRICE! =DSince the E-500 has been discontinued and its replacement, the E-510 has shake reduction in the body plus 10 MP and Live View, I don't think it's much of a question now.
The comparision is between K100D and E500 and not E510.PRICE! =D
For poor people like me, $860 versus $1400 (I got that right right?) for E510.. Er, I don't think it's much of a question either. =(
Well someone brought in the E510, hee hee.Crop factor? I think this is less an issue than the lenses: the range, quality and availability. ZD's quality is of course unquestionable.
Well someone brought in the E510, hee hee.
Pentax lens have pretty superb quality..
Another plus point about Pentax - compatible with any K-mount lens, which means loads and loads of old lenses - that can be quite budget if you can find them.
But how many people are buying the expensive Sony lenses? Many of the lenses in Sony's lineup were re-badged Minoltas and cost a lot more than the Minolta versions. And if you're gonna be more out of pocket with the Carl Zeiss lenses...Much like Minolta/Sony A-mount...
For the K100D, if you bundle the excellent DA 50-200mm zoom, the price is very close to the E500's 2 lens bundle. The K100D may not have dust reduction, but it has the very useful Shake Reduction. And it does have spot metering too.The comparision is between K100D and E500 and not E510.
I think pricewise, E500 is better as it comes with 2 kit lens, more megapixels, more user friendly interface and one or two rather sophisticated features, like spot metering and dust reduction/removal.
PRICE! =D
For poor people like me, $860 versus $1400 (I got that right right?) for E510.. Er, I don't think it's much of a question either. =(
I did introduce the E-510 to the argument, but not to cause problems. It's just a much nicer body. The price of the body is currently more than the E-500 2 lens kit but, considering the increased function, it's worth it.Well someone brought in the E510, hee hee.
Pentax lens have pretty superb quality..
Another plus point about Pentax - compatible with any K-mount lens, which means loads and loads of old lenses - that can be quite budget if you can find them.
That's funny. The only reason why I bought the K100D was because it had the second best image quality for the 6 MGP class DSLR, second after D40. According to about 5 or more reviews. D50 and D70 couldn't compare either.According to the What Digital Camera review, the K100D doesn't seem to have great image quality, full stop. Both cameras have too much buried in the menus. Lenses are about equal unless you want old, old lenses that aren't designed for digital Pentax bodies.
Don't get me wrong. I've recommended the K100D several times. Under the best conditions, both cameras work well and in poor lighting, the K100D works better.That's funny. The only reason why I bought the K100D was because it had the second best image quality for the 6 MGP class DSLR, second after D40. According to about 5 or more reviews. D50 and D70 couldn't compare either.
If you're talking about on the large scale, against every other 8 MGP and 10 MGP DSLR.. Then you're not being very fair , are you? Which is why K100D vs E500 is a pretty idiotic and inane argument. It's like comparing an apple with a pear and asking which is nicer to eat.
K100D should be compared with stuff like D40, D50, D70, and some of the other obscure models like Samsung's, if I'm not wrong.
E500 should be compared with stuff like 350D. It just makes more sense.