What’s Your Preference?

PentaxLuver · #31 (**permalink**) 11-30-2009, 11:43 PM

Back many years ago, I purchased a Petri FT camera because it was inexpensive and I had no idea how to use a SLR. That camera sort of bit the dust, after I carried it around two Mediterranean cruises with the Navy and also around numerous places in the USA. I replaced it with a K1000 SE which, I found, was very similar in handling to the FT. I liked the fully manual operation and the ease of handling. I fell in love with the K1000 so much I ended up with another. Still liked my original Petri and have since replaced it with two others. All together I now have two K1000 SEs and two FTs, all in excellent working order. Three years ago I started employment with a company taking photos of school students for yearbooks. The company uses Canon cameras (20Ds, now 40Ds), which are very nice, but to me are a bit cumbersome and heavy. I decided to go digital and bought a Pentax istDL which I really like. However, I would like a little more mp resolution so have been looking to pick up a K2000 after reading they reportedly seem similar to the K1000 in durability.

That said, I am wondering, why most of the companies are discontinuing a camera model soon after introducing it and pushing a "new" or "upgraded" model? I understand the K2000 is now discontinued and replaced with the K7, which also shoots video. So, why are they all pushing the video component in a DSLR? Personally, I wish to be a "photographer" not a "videographer". If I wanted to shoot video, I'd have a video camera, not a still camera.

navcom · #32 (**permalink**) 12-01-2009, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PentaxLuver

That said, I am wondering, why most of the companies are discontinuing a camera model soon after introducing it and pushing a "new" or "upgraded" model? I understand the K2000 is now discontinued and replaced with the K7, which also shoots video. So, why are they all pushing the video component in a DSLR? Personally, I wish to be a "photographer" not a "videographer". If I wanted to shoot video, I'd have a video camera, not a still camera.

I've wondered the same thing. I think video was added to woo the generic consumer, not necessarily the serious photographer. Then, once one did it, it became a "follow the herd" mentality. Nobody wants to be the one that doesn't offer it. Also, there is a push to "redefine" multi-media. This is one of those marketing ploys.

Personally, I think it's very silly. I purchase SLR's to take pictures. We own a camcorder and I rarely use it anyway. I certainly don't want to pay extra on an SLR for an expensive feature I will never use.

ksuwildkat · #33 (**permalink**) 12-12-2009, 10:26 PM

I was taking a picture of a group recently and after I finished one of the people walked over and asked "Is that a Cannon or Nikon?" After mentally choking him while shoving a 300mm lens down his throat, responded nicely "No, a Pentax" to which he said "Oh, I didn't know they made Digital SLRs." I mentally choked him again.
Mr. Choking victim is not the only one who thinks only Cannon and Nikon make DSLRs. Some people know Sony makes them too

The lineup
My initial candidates were the Pentax K200D, Pentax K2000/k-m, Nikon D60, Nikon D40, Cannon EOS 450, Panasonic DMC-G1. Right at decision time the Nikon D5000 and Cannon EOS 500 were announced and gave me serious headaches! I never really considered any Sony or Olympus models.

Cut Day
I eliminated the D40 because it was too limited. The combination of the 6MP sensor and limited autofocus lens selection was just too much of too little. I plan to use this body for 5+ years so I decided 10MP was my target. Yes, I know there is more than MP count but I wanted the ability to make large prints.
Next to go was the EOS 450. Other than price I cant think of a good reason to eliminate it. I just didnt connect with the Cannon. The feel was just wrong for me. Something about the Cannon way of thinking doesn't match me because I have issues with my wife's Cannon S5 P&S.
I thought REALLY hard about the Pansonic DMC-G1. My last P&S/Supersoom was an FZ8 and I really loved it. Actually, I still have it and use it when I dont want to carry as much or if there is a serious hazard to my camera. I loved the size and true live view of the G1 plus the video capability but the price and sensor sent it packing. The G1, like the Olympus E520, uses a micro 4/3 sensor with a 2x FOV crop. One of the things I wanted was a bigger, softer sensor and the 4/3 was not what I was looking for. I have also learned, the hard way, not to buy version 1.0.
The D5000/EOS500 threw me for a loop but at the end of the day, the major advantage of them was video with a HUGE increase in price. I have a video camera (a Cannon - see I dont discriminate!) and I dont use it much compared to my still camera. I would have to sacrifice a lot of still capability in the form of lenses and accessories to get video and that was not my purpose in going to a DSLR.

The Contenders
My final choices were the K200, K2000 and the D60.
I really liked the price and size of the K2000. Because standard kit included a dedicated flash which would save me money initially. It also had slightly better ISO performance than the K200. On the bad side it came with an older kit lens despite being a new camera and it had some other major shortcomings. There is no ability to select the focus point which seriously limits creativity. It also has no weather seals and the included flash is fixed at 90 degrees. Much like the D40, I was concerned that I would outgrow the K2000 far too fast.

Championship bout
So I was down to the D60 and the K200. I will admit that the K200 came in with a "reach" advantage - my first real SLR was a Pentax K1000 - but I had also always dreamed of a Nikon. The initial price was a push since they were only $10 different on the day I got mine. But initial price was only half the story. Nikon decided a long time ago to put image stabilization on the lens instead of on the body. That was probably because the technology for lens stabilization predated affordable digital bodies and Nikon could sell a lot of new lenses to film guys long before they could convince them that digital could replace film. Pentax decided to make every lens better by putting the stabilization in body. But that meant that any improvement in stabilization means getting a new body. Those decisions mean that with Nikon, you pay for stabilization every time you buy a lens but newer lenses might have better stabilization. With Pentax you pay for it once but you are stuck with that level. Nikon also decided that the D60 was for "new" Nikon shooters and did not make it Autofocus compatible with older lenses. So along with paying for IS each time, you are limited to newer lenses and a more limited range. If you wanted the compatibility, you had to jump up to the D80 or better - at a significant cost. There were some other features left to D80 or better buyers - the D60 has no vertical grip or battery grip. There is no built in wireless flash capability. There is no option for uncompressed RAW and no ability to control Noise Reduction. And like the K2000, it has no weather seals. In fact, dust is such an issue, it has a very complex dust removal system. Finally there was the feel. It felt cramped in my hand and with anything except the 18-50mm kit lens, it felt unbalanced because the body seemed too light.
The K200D had a lot of the features the D60 lacked. The in body stabilization meant I could get some seriously budget lenses right off the bat. My first non-kit lens was a 28-80mm Tamron that cost $44. Sure its not pro glass but for $44 if I get 2 or 3 pics a year that I love, it was worth it. The same lens for Nikon cost $90 and on the D60 it would have been manual focus. I got a battery grip with a vertical shutter button for $30 and because the K200 takes AA batteries, I got great Eneloop recharables for less than half what an extra Nikon (or anyone else including the one used on the Pentax K20D) battery cost. And I can use the same batteries in my flash. Im really glad Im not stuck buying Panasonic batteries now that they have disabled 3rd party batteries. The feel of the camera with the battery pack attached is perfect to me and the weather seals give me confidence to shoot in pretty rough conditions. Wireless flash is built in meaning my $250 AF-360 purchase added off camera flash at no additional cost. But I did give up some things with the K200D. The burst rate and continuous speed on the Pentax is no match for the Nikon. Right now I mostly shoot flowers and landscapes so its not as big a deal. But it is limiting. ISO performance past 800 is really not good. I would only use 1600 in a pinch. And there is no denying that Nikon glass is special. My 5MP Nikon CP5400 took incredible pictures that I attributed to the lens. Try finding a Pentax dealer in anything except a LARGE town let alone overseas and renting equipment is right out. The Pentax "ecosystem" is just no match for the Big 2. Final downside - I have suffered from Pentax "focus hunting." I have not used other systems enough to know how they do but I have missed some shots because of it.

Final verdict
In the end it came down to total cost of ownership. The Pentax was going to give me more bang for the buck initially and allow me to add capability much cheaper than the Nikon. Even things like lens filters were cheaper on the Pentax because the lenses are smaller around. That meant I could get more creative sooner rather than later. And the "feel" of the camera cannot be underrated. If you dont like holding your camera, you wont. The D60 and the D40 didn't feel right in my hand, the K200 did. I plan to hold it for a long time. And I wont pretend there was not a bit of contrarian "be different" going on. I owned a Beta VCR (I waited until BluRay won), listen to strange music and was a Mac guy long before it was cool. Maybe when I am super wealthy and I can but anything I want I will get my dream Nikon but I will probably always be a Pentax guy.

sarahenn · #34 (**permalink**) 12-18-2009, 10:44 PM

I'm new to the forum and new to DSLR photography, but not so new to Pentax.

My first point-and-shoot was a Pentax back in 1999, and I loved that camera, even though I never really knew how to use it. Then I got a hand-me-down Pentax Optio digital camera a few years ago... and just this week, I got myself an early Christmas present, the K-x.

Since I'm such a beginner, I wanted something that would take great pictures in auto mode, but as I begin to learn how to control all the different aspects of a picture, I can still take good shots. I went into a camera store and held a Canon, Nikon and Pentax, and the K-x had the most appealing/user-friendly menu, and it felt good in my hands. Love that I can use all past Pentax lenses, and the shake reduction was another selling point for me. Also, the price point for all the features (including the ability to shoot video), I just couldn't pass it up.

And I agree with a previous comment, I kinda like having "the underdog" brand, I was thiiiiiis close to getting the Canon Xsi and I'm glad I didn't.

kyteflyer · #35 (**permalink**) 01-07-2010, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ksuwildkat

...
In the end it came down to total cost of ownership. The Pentax was going to give me more bang for the buck initially and allow me to add capability much cheaper than the Nikon. ...

Thats pretty much it for me as well, but also the fact that the K200D as an entry level camera (as it was at the time I bought it, the K2000 was a couple of months later) was more well specced than its market competitors (Canon 1000D, Nikon D40x, Olympus E520 and Sony A200). So many "pro" features in a dead cheap camera. Not only that, but because its so well and roundly ignored, there are regular sales when you can get it for well under retail... which is what I did, and haven't regretted it for a moment.

Lenses aren't much cheaper than the competition, in Australia, but I'm happy with my purchase. (Although a K-x tempts, for its lightweight nature... K-x for regular photography and K200D if the weather is rubbish)

RichardTaylor · #36 (**permalink**) 01-07-2010, 09:10 AM

My first SLR was a Asahi Pentax SV purchased around 1962 when I was a teenager. Main reason was that they were a lot better than a Practica and my boss knew the manager of a camera store who was willing to sell me one for a reasonable price. It was the start of a love afair that lasted up until I got involved with girls and motorcycles.

Replaced it with a pair of Asahi Pentax Spotmatics around 1964/5 when I got serious about photography. Also had Takumar 28/50/135/300mm and a 50mm macro lenses.

I now shoot with a Canon 40D & 5D mainly because of the availability of good lenses, including primes.

Mad Ged · #37 (**permalink**) 01-09-2010, 10:56 AM

I picked Pentax because of fond memories of my first serious (for me) camera. It was an amazing little SLR which used 110 film cartridges. I bought it back in the 70's when I spied it in a camera shop and had to have it immediately. See attached pics.

It came with 3 interchangeable lenses and took remarkably good pictures considering the size of the film.

When I first decided to buy a digital SLR I went for the K100D Super and then moved to a K20D and yesterday I bought a K7 - what can I say, I am a camera junkie and a Pentax lover.

I think the K7 will keep me satisfied for a while now, I love it.

idb · #38 (**permalink**) 03-25-2010, 09:26 PM

I started out nearly 40 years ago with an Olympus 35mm rangefinder which served me very well for a few years and allowed me to learn all the basics.
I upgraded to a Minolta SRT-102 which came with 3 lenses, 50/1.7, 35/2.5 and 135/2.8. I gradually added more lenses and eventually a second and third body (X-70 and X-700).
I was very disappointed when Minolta changed their lens mount when the went to auto-focus but did not really see the appeal of auto-focus anyway.
Then digital photography came along and it was only the AF lenses that were compatible with the digital cameras. That was a huge disappointment.
Then Minolta went out of the camera business altogether.

I persisted with 35mm for quite a while after digital swept the market but eventually got my first digital - a Sony DSC H-1 P&S.
When I finally made the leap to a DSLR I wanted something affordable (therefore not Nikon or Canon) and something not likely to change lens mounts or quit making cameras.
That's when I discovered that Pentax was still using the same lens mount they have used for years. This gives me lots more options when I ever get a chance to add any lenses.

So far I am very pleased with my K200D and four lenses.

Ian