On Sep 18, 2006, at 4:25 PM, Ken Takeshita wrote:
> On 9/18/06, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Via DP Review discussion board...
>> http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2006/09/body-size-k10d-vs-k100d.html
>
> Hmm, that's a fair size and heavy (710g), although still relatively
> compact with comparable competitions (not by much). Some weight may
> feel comfortable in hands rather than a featherweight.
> I wonder what is making it so large compared with the K100D. Yes,
> more processing power but the physical size of the CPU should not be
> so bulky anyway. It certainly looks thicker.
> Maybe a larger power management unit for the more robust SR and
> perhaps more powerful AF driver (motor)?
I suspect a lot of the additional size comes from the weather
sealing. Also, we must be realistic about the weight as being WITH
battery ...
Weight
No battery: 717 g (1.6 lb)
With battery: 793 (1.7 lb)
Dimensions 142 x 101 x 70 mm (5.6 x 4.0 x 2.8 in)
I don't mind the size and weight so much though. It's still smaller
and lighter than my Canon 10D
Weight (inc. batteries) 875 g (1.9 lbs)
Dimensions 150 x 107 x 75 mm (5.9 x 4.2 x 3 in)
or the competing Nikon D200
Weight
(no batt) 830 g (1.8 lb)
(inc. batt) 920 g (2.0 lb)
Dimensions 147 x 113 x 74 mm (5.8 x 4.4 x 2.9 in)
Of course, the *ist DS seems like a featherweight by comparison:
Weight (inc. batteries) 605 g (21.3 oz)
Dimensions 125 x 93 x 66 mm (4.9 x 3.7 x 2.6 in)
And then there's the Leica M8 ...
Weight
(no battery) 545 g (1.2 lb)
(inc. batt) 591 g (1.3 lb)
Dimensions 139 x 80 x 37 mm (5.5 x 3.1 x 1.5 in)
Nice how the lack of a reflex mirrorbox thins out the M8.
Godfrey
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
