Canon 2000D vs Pentax K-1

The Canon EOS 2000D (called Canon T7 in some regions) and the Pentax K-1 are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in February 2018 and February 2016. Both are DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex) cameras that are based on an APS-C (2000D) and a full frame (K-1) sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 24 megapixels, whereas the Pentax provides 36.2 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Canon 2000D		Pentax K-1
Digital single lens reflex		Digital single lens reflex
Canon EF mount lenses		Pentax K mount lenses
24 MP, APS-C Sensor		36.2 MP, Full Frame Sensor
1080/30p Video		1080/60i Video
ISO 100-6400 (100-12800)		ISO 100-204800
Optical viewfinder		Optical viewfinder
3.0" LCD, 920k dots		3.2" LCD, 1037k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fully flexible screen (no touchscreen)
3 shutter flaps per second		4.4 shutter flaps per second
Lens stabilization only		In-body stabilization
Not weather sealed		Weathersealed body
500 shots per battery charge		760 shots per battery charge
129 x 101 x 78 mm, 475 g		137 x 110 x 86 mm, 1010 g

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Canon EOS 2000D and the Pentax K-1? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

The physical size and weight of the Canon 2000D and the Pentax K-1 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The K-1 can be obtained in two different colors (black, silver), while the 2000D is only available in black.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Pentax K-1 is notably larger (16 percent) than the Canon 2000D. Moreover, the K-1 is substantially heavier (113 percent) than the 2000D. It is noteworthy in this context that the K-1 is splash and dust-proof, while the 2000D does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. Hence, you might want to study and compare the specifications of available lenses in order to get the full picture of the size and weight of the two camera systems.

Concerning battery life, the 2000D gets 500 shots out of its LP-E10 battery, while the K-1 can take 760 images on a single charge of its D-LI90 power pack.

The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.

Camera Body Specifications

	Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life (CIPA)	Weather Sealing (yes/no)	Camera Launch (announced)	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price (USD)	Used Price (USD)	Camera Model
	Canon 2000D»	5.1 in	4.0 in	3.1 in	16.8 oz	500	n	Feb 2018	449			Canon 2000D
	Pentax K-1«	5.4 in	4.3 in	3.4 in	35.6 oz	760	Y	Feb 2016	1,799	-		Pentax K-1
	Canon 4000D« »	5.1 in	4.0 in	3.0 in	15.4 oz	500	n	Feb 2018	399			Canon 4000D
	Canon 77D« »	5.2 in	3.9 in	3.0 in	19.0 oz	600	n	Feb 2017	899			Canon 77D
	Canon 200D« »	4.8 in	3.7 in	2.8 in	16.0 oz	650	n	Jun 2017	549	-		Canon 200D
	Canon 800D« »	5.2 in	3.9 in	3.0 in	18.8 oz	600	n	Feb 2017	749			Canon 800D
	Canon G9 X Mark II« »	3.9 in	2.3 in	1.2 in	7.3 oz	235	n	Jan 2017	529			Canon G9 X Mark II
	Canon M100« »	4.3 in	2.6 in	1.4 in	10.7 oz	295	n	Aug 2017	499			Canon M100
	Canon 5D Mark IV« »	5.9 in	4.6 in	3.0 in	31.4 oz	900	Y	Aug 2016	3,499			Canon 5D Mark IV
	Canon 1300D« »	5.1 in	4.0 in	3.1 in	17.1 oz	500	n	Mar 2016	449	-		Canon 1300D
	Canon 750D« »	5.2 in	4.0 in	3.1 in	19.6 oz	440	n	Feb 2015	749	-		Canon 750D
	Canon 760D« »	5.2 in	4.0 in	3.1 in	19.9 oz	440	n	Feb 2015	649	-		Canon 760D
	Canon 1200D« »	5.1 in	3.9 in	3.1 in	16.9 oz	500	n	Feb 2014	449	-		Canon 1200D
	Nikon D500« »	5.8 in	4.5 in	3.2 in	30.3 oz	1240	Y	Jan 2016	1,999			Nikon D500
	Olympus E-M1 II« »	5.3 in	3.6 in	2.6 in	20.2 oz	440	Y	Sep 2016	1,999			Olympus E-M1 II
	Pentax K-1 II« »	5.4 in	4.3 in	3.4 in	35.6 oz	670	Y	Feb 2018	1,999			Pentax K-1 II
	Sony A99 II« »	5.6 in	4.1 in	3.0 in	29.9 oz	490	Y	Sep 2016	3,199			Sony A99 II
Convert to Metric
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.

The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The 2000D was launched at a markedly lower price (by 75 percent) than the K-1, which puts it into a different market segment. Normally, street prices remain initially close to the MSRP, but after a couple of months, the first discounts appear. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.

Sensor comparison

The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units in a sensor of the same technological generation. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Canon 2000D features an APS-C sensor and the Pentax K-1 a full frame sensor. The sensor area in the K-1 is 160 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.6 and 1.0. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.

Technology-wise, both cameras are equipped with CMOS (Complementary Metal–Oxide–Semiconductor) sensors.

With 36.2MP, the K-1 offers a higher resolution than the 2000D (24MP), but the K-1 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 4.88μm versus 3.72μm for the 2000D) due to its larger sensor. However, the 2000D is a much more recent model (by 2 years) than the K-1, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the K-1 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Pentax K-1 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the K-1 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 36.8 x 24.6 inch or 93.5 x 62.4 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 29.4 x 19.6 inch or 74.8 x 49.9 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 24.5 x 16.4 inch or 62.3 x 41.6 cm. The corresponding values for the Canon 2000D are 30 x 20 inch or 76.2 x 50.8 cm for good quality, 24 x 16 inch or 61 x 40.6 cm for very good quality, and 20 x 13.3 inch or 50.8 x 33.9 cm for excellent quality prints.

Unlike the 2000D, the K-1 has the capacity to capture high quality composite images by combining multiple shots after shifting its sensor by miniscule distances. This multi-shot, pixel-shift mode is most suitable for photography of stationary objects (landscapes, studio scenes).

The Canon EOS 2000D has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400, which can be extended to ISO 100-12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Pentax K-1 are ISO 100 to ISO 204800 (no boost).

Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). Of the two cameras under consideration, the K-1 offers substantially better image quality than the 2000D (overall score 25 points higher). The advantage is based on 2.8 bits higher color depth, 2.7 EV in additional dynamic range, and 1.7 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.

Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the K-1 provides a faster frame rate than the 2000D. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60i, while the Canon is limited to 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The 2000D and the K-1 are similar in the sense that both have an optical viewfinder. The latter is useful for getting a clear image for framing even in brightly lit environments. The viewfinder in the K-1 offers a wider field of view (100%) than the one in the 2000D (95%), so that a larger proportion of the captured image is visible in the finder. In addition, the viewfinder of the K-1 has a higher magnification (0.70x vs 0.50x), so that the size of the image transmitted appears closer to the size seen with the naked human eye. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Canon 2000D, the Pentax K-1, and comparable cameras.

One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The 2000D has one, while the K-1 does not. While the built-in flash of the 2000D is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.

The Pentax K-1 has an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the 2000D and the K-1 write their files to SDXC cards. The K-1 features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the 2000D only has one slot. The K-1 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the 2000D cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD cards.

Connectivity comparison

For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Canon EOS 2000D and Pentax K-1 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

It is notable that the K-1 has a headphone jack, which makes it possible to attach external headphones and monitor the quality of sound during the recording process. The 2000D lacks such a headphone port.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Pentax K-1 (unlike the 2000D) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Travel and landscape photographers will find it useful that the K-1 has an internal geolocalization sensor and can record GPS coordinates in its EXIF data.

The 2000D is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Canon. In contrast, the K-1 has been discontinued (but it can be found pre-owned on eBay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the K-1 was succeeded by the Pentax K-1 II. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Canon and Pentax websites.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Is the Canon 2000D better than the Pentax K-1 or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Arguments in favor of the Canon EOS 2000D:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• More compact: Is smaller (129x101mm vs 137x110mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
• Less heavy: Is lighter (by 535g or 53 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
• Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
• Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (75 percent cheaper at launch).
• More modern: Reflects 2 years of technical progress since the K-1 launch.

Reasons to prefer the Pentax K-1:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (36.2 vs 24MP), which boosts linear resolution by 23%.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (25 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
• Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (2.8 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (2.7 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (1.7 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60i versus 1080/30p).
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• Better sound control: Has a headphone port that enables audio monitoring while recording.
• More complete view: Has a viewfinder with a larger field of view (100% vs 95%).
• Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.70x vs 0.50x).
• Easier setting verification: Features a control panel on top to check shooting parameters.
• Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.2" vs 3.0") for image review and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 920k dots).
• More flexible LCD: Has a full-flex screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/4000s) to freeze action.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (4.4 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (760 versus 500) out of a single battery charge.
• Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
• Sharper images: Has stabilization technology built-in to reduce the impact of hand-shake.
• Easier geotagging: Features an internal GPS sensor to log localization data.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in February 2016).

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the K-1 is the clear winner of the contest (27 : 7 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs before making a camera decision. A professional wildlife photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a family photog, and a person interested in architecture has distinct needs from a sports shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Canon 2000D and the Pentax K-1 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best DSLR Camera listing whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the 2000D and the K-1 in practical situations. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased.

Expert reviews

This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, and photographyblog). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.

Review Scores

	Camera Model						Camera Launch (announced)	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price (USD)	Used Price (USD)	Camera Model
	Canon 2000D»	o	-	3.5/5	-	3.5/5	Feb 2018	449			Canon 2000D
	Pentax K-1«	-	84/100	5/5	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2016	1,799	-		Pentax K-1
	Canon 4000D« »	o	-	3.5/5	-	3.5/5	Feb 2018	399			Canon 4000D
	Canon 77D« »	-	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4/5	Feb 2017	899			Canon 77D
	Canon 200D« »	+ +	78/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2017	549	-		Canon 200D
	Canon 800D« »	-	80/100	4.5/5	4/5	4/5	Feb 2017	749			Canon 800D
	Canon G9 X Mark II« »	-	75/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	529			Canon G9 X Mark II
	Canon M100« »	+	-	4/5	-	3.5/5	Aug 2017	499			Canon M100
	Canon 5D Mark IV« »	+ +	87/100	4.5/5	5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2016	3,499			Canon 5D Mark IV
	Canon 1300D« »	o	73/100	4/5	3.5/5	4/5	Mar 2016	449	-		Canon 1300D
	Canon 750D« »	-	75/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	749	-		Canon 750D
	Canon 760D« »	+	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	649	-		Canon 760D
	Canon 1200D« »	+	-	4/5	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2014	449	-		Canon 1200D
	Nikon D500« »	+ +	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	5/5	Jan 2016	1,999			Nikon D500
	Olympus E-M1 II« »	+ +	85/100	4.5/5	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2016	1,999			Olympus E-M1 II
	Pentax K-1 II« »	-	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2018	1,999			Pentax K-1 II
	Sony A99 II« »	-	85/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2016	3,199			Sony A99 II
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (-) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make your choice using the following search menu. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

Specifications: Canon 2000D vs Pentax K-1

Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.

Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.