[noblepa]

When I was in high school, way back in the dark ages (1967), I saved up my money to buy a "real" camera.

I looked at all the brands available then; Pentax, Mamiya, Miranda, Nikon, Yashica and the rest. I soon realized that the Nikon F was a great camera. I used to watch Huntley & Brinkley and see journalists jumping out of Huey's into rice paddies in Vietnam with two or three Nikons around their necks.

But then, I realized that, while the Nikon was a great camera, I didn't need all the features it had; interchangeable backs, interchangeable viewfinders, motor drives, mirror lockup, etc. I wasn't planning on jumping out of Huey's into rice paddies, if I could avoid it. Furthermore, everything I read about Pentax lenses said that they were second to none in terms of image quality. So, I bought a Spotmatic, which I still have. The Spotmatic probably wouldn't have survived the kind of rough treatment that a professional photojournalist would subject a camera to, but, then I'm not a photojournalist. The Spotmatic has survived a fair amount of abuse, anyway.

To my mind, the Pentax line has always offered the best balance of features-that-I-will-actually-use to price. IOW, the best value. Sure, the Nikon D200 has a higher frame rate, it has a titanium body and other features that I would seldom, if ever, use, but, even now, after the D300 has been in the market for a while, the D200 costs twice as much as my K10D.

I've always liked the ergonomics of Pentax cameras, as well. The Spotmatic remains one of the most comfortable cameras I've ever held. My K10D fits my hand like a glove. Some have complained that the K10D is too big, but I don't think so. A friend bought an Olympus E-510. It felt like a toy in my hands. Even my brother's D200 doesn't feel as right as my K10D.

I could buy a higher-spec'ed camera (I hesitate to use the term "better") or I could buy a cheaper camera. I find that the Pentax, for me, hits the sweet spot, in terms of build quality, image quality and affordability.